Conference terri::cars_uk

    
    I think it is ridiculous to allow someone out onto the motorway with no
    practical tuition on how to behave. It's all very well driving down an
    A road with the instructor, and  being _told_ what to do on Motorways , 
    but nothing can substitute for experience. It should be compulsory to
    have X lessons after passing your test, before you can hand in your
    provisional licence.
    
    I know it would be impossible in some areas to do this, but then it
    could be an explicit exemption if there is no M'way within, say 30miles
    of the test centre. 

    Having reasonably recently passed my test, I think some kind of part
    two involving Mways is a good idea, even if it is a non-examinable
    option.  I took up the option of a couple of sessions with my
    instructor after my test, and I'm glad I did.  I regularly travel the
    M6, and that can get a bit hairy.
    
    I'm not sure it should be used as an excuse to raise speed limits tho',
    just to make sure people are safe in the existing conditions.
    I thnk that to raise the speed limit, firstly the amount of traffic on
    Mways should be reduced, maybe this new idea of toll roads for lorries
    (or something like that) will help?
    
    Mikef

    I totally agree in concept of having 'P' plate of something of that
    order. I travel on average 60 miles on motorways per day ( excluding
    weekends ) and some of the driving is worst than diabolical. This is
    not entirly restricted to motorways although it is diabolical at 
    greater speed than on the main roads. I generally travel at the same
    speed as the general flow of traffic, which on most motorways seems to
    be about 80. I get annoyed when people undertake,pull out without
    looking, or travel right up my exhaust pipe and worst than that sit in
    the middle lane and not moving. 
    
    
    I don't honestly think that lessons on just motorway driving are
    nessesary. I really think that the general standard of driving is
    digusting and that some tuition on courtesy and driving ethics
    would be far better. I am never amazed at where and how people try
    to overtake. I'm sure Elaine (provided that Derek has received it)
    will have seen the latest RAC MSA update (motorsport) , they are
    getting concerned that about the standard of driving by racing drivers
    and are considering punishing bad driving. Without making
    generalizations and rubbing a few people up the wrong way , I have my
    own ideas about some of the causes etc but I'll leave it to others
    discuss the why's and wherefore's. I am by no means the worlds best
    driver but I at least try to be sensible on the road , drive to the
    road/traffic conditions and at least try to "read the road". I save the
    fast aggressive driving for the race track where it should be safer to
    drive like that and at least everyone , I would hope, is more aware of
    what is going on around them an should be thinking a bit more about
    what they are doing ( not true in every case ).
    
    
    	Garry
    
    
    
    
    and save the fast
    aggressive driving for the race track where it should be safer to drive
    like that.
    

    
    As a sweeping generalisation, I think that one of the main things
    missing from the roads is courtesy (as the prev note mentioned) - how
    many times have you been held up because someone _won't_ give way, or
    won't wait 5 seconds for someone to complete a manoever which would
    clear the 'obstruction'. There is too much impatience. Often when I am
    coming into work in the morning (to DEC Park) I am overtaken in dubious
    places by people who are just going to end up in the queue of traffic 
    waiting to cross the motorway, and who I will just pass on my motorbike
    in a couple of minutes.  
    
    Another thing, are people trying to justify the amount spent on a car
    which will do 0-60 in a fraction of a second faster, or is capable of 
    travelling at X miles an hour faster than someone who has spent
    considerably less? 
    has spent considerably less

    I agree with .4, have you ever got stuck in a jam because people won't
    leave a gap on a roundabout during heavy traffic (or been abused
    because you have tried to leave a gap)?
    
    Mikef

    Yeh , sounds like some of the people contributing if not all are on the same
    wave lenght. Going back to the point Elaine made about 0-60 and money
    spent to acheive it. I get bore/fed_up with people quoting standing
    quarter or 0-60 times, my BMW motorcycle is listed as 0-60 in 4 seconds
    and they only rate it to a top speed of 125, funny enough all 1000cc
    K series BMW's are rated at 125, they obviously don't consider you need
    to go any faster. I ordinarily wouldn't bother but I recently went
    testing with BMW at Thruxton so that kind of detail comes up. I realize
    that I have just gone quoted a 0-60 but what is the point of having a
    car that will accelerate to 60 in the bat of an eyelid and has a top
    speed of say 150 MPH ???? Is it essential that you be able to get
    between traffic jams quicker and have a top speed that twice the
    national speed limit and therefore not legally achievable. I have
    no idea if the figures quoted are right and really couldn't give a
    monkies. To generalize , I think that far too much importance is placed
    on this kind of detail and not really important things like
    handling,tyres etc. I also think that new drivers should have a limited
    BHP for the first year or 2 so that they can gain experiance first. 
    
    
    Not many people would agree with this but I think, rightly or wrongly,
     if drivers were made to ride a motorcycle or x period of time
    they would soon see the rights and wrongs and understand how just being
    a little courtious can improve traffic and cut down accidents.
    
    	Garry

	Well I for one would agree on drivers spending some time on a motorbike.
	
	I had a couple of bikes over a period of five years and there's no
	better way to learn the art of self preservation. Riding to
	suit traffic/general road conditions is a neccesity if gravel rash, or
	sometimes worse, is to be avoided. The results of mistakes, even minor 
	ones, made by motocyclists when they don't take care are invariably 
	far more painfull than those suffered by the car driver.

	My only big accident on a motorbike was a classic "I just didn't see
	you" one caused by a driver who pulled across a dual carriageway giving
	me a choice on 'T' boning his car or trying my luck grass tracking on
	the central reservation. I was lucky, being out of hospital in a few
	hours, but after this I still view cars waiting at junctions, and for 
	that matter, the majority of road users as accidents waiting to happen.

	Well that presumption has kept me out of trouble for over 10 years now
	so riding for five years or so was an education.

	Gordon

	Totally agree with last couple of notes.

	I spent my first two years on the road on two wheels and the
	  experience of driving to survive still lasts.

	I certainly think it has helped my awareness of road conditions
	  and thinking ahead.

I agree with motorbikes teaching you to expect traffic to pull out in front of
you (despite headlamps on and bright jackets).  On a bike, I presume that
traffic hasn't seen me, in a car, I tend to presume that it has.  Although, I
never presume that anything has seen me, until I see some sign that it has, the
back of someone's head as he/she approaches a junction with your road is not
enough.

However, if you are over 21 and a motorcycle rider, then, almost by definition,
you are a safe motorcycle rider (95% of accidents happen between 17 and 21).
I can also believe that riding a bike wouldn't teach some people anything at 
all.

Anyway, back to motorways.  They are a safe, fast and efficient way of covering
vast distances if, and only if, drivers drive properly.  For some reason, bad
driving practices seem more dangerous on a motorway than on an A road.   I
guess that you can get away from a bad driver on an A road, either overtake 
him or her, or let him or her overtake you, or just stop at the next pub.  The
next question to ask, is why is driving so bad on motorways?  Lack of lane
discipline stands out as a good reason.  Everyone cramming into the outside
lane means that you, effectively, reduce a motorway to a duel carriage way, so
it can only take two-thirds the traffic.  Lack of consideration for others also
plays a part, in other words, attitude.  Sheer volume of traffic also plays its
part; no matter how well behaved the traffic, if there is too much of it, then
you'll be slower getting from A to B.

What I find interesting about this note (and this conference in general) is 
that quite a few people want extra rules to control things (no lorries in the
middle lane, proven fast cars allowed to go as fast as they like, overtaking on
the left and right etc) but the same people are highly contemptuous of the
police and of the current rules.  Extra legislation doesn't help unless it is
backed by the rule of law; all that helps is better driving.  The only debate
in town is how do you get drivers to a better standard of driving and keep
them there?

Dave

Cycling is a good way of learning how to be safe on roads; motorists are even
more likely to pull out in front of cyclists than motorcyclists because they
are even less visible and are assumed to be able to stop / avoid anything.

Scott

    
    In general, I think the Police should put more effort into the
    enforcement of dangerous driving, and inconsiderate driving, rather
    than speeding. The problem with that, though, is that it is far more
    subjective, speeding is speeding, it is an absolute offence, and can
    be measured. Dangerous driving relies on a description of events and is
    therefor far more open to interpretation, and (sweeping generalisation
    to follow) leading to more time in court for officers, for fewer
    convictions, and what are the Police measured on? They are seen to be
    doing their job, if they get so many convictions per month.
    

RE .11
    
>>    In general, I think the Police should put more effort into the
>>    enforcement of dangerous driving, and inconsiderate driving...

Maybe we should all have to go on "Death Race 2000" refresher courses as well!

:-)

Steve 

    
    
    	I do get annoyed by people cricising the efforts of the police
    when they OBVIOUSLY do not know where the Traffic departments
    priorities lie, let alone the type of driver that they are more
    keen to prosecute.
    	I claim to be in a strong position here because my other half
    is a Class One driver in a local Traffic Dept.
    
    	Oh and if you think that all they think about is speeders, then
    why do you think they have just invested in SEVERAL unmarked, non-white
    cars fitted with video camera's ?? they certainly are NOT designed
    to pick up the over 70 merchants !!
    
    	Another thing that you might like to consider is that it is
    no longer the police who prosecute people in court on driving offences,
    but a civvie off-shoot... beleive you me the number of times my
    other half is frustrated by the lack of commitment by these people,
    and the failure of the courts to really punish bad drivers is
    unbeleivable.
    
    
    On every other point, ie standards of driving I whole-heartedly
    agree with what just about everyone has said !!!!!

    
    re -2, Sorry about my very badly written reply - but you know what I
    mean!
    
    re -1, I realise the Police have a very difficult job - and that they
    are at the mercy of 'the system', _but_, maybe they don't do a
    particularly good job at advertising what they are doing, many reports
    you see refer to speeding offences, and most people are under the
    impression that the Police are mainly 'after' speeders. (and
    drunk-drivers) Maybe more publicity  should be given to the other 
    types of drivers they are keen to prosecute.

    
     Forget the speeding, undertaking and general moronic behaviour on our
    motorways - bad lane discipline is by far the worst and potentially
    most dangerous problem.
    
    If this can ever be enforced as a punishable offence then hanging would
    be a good starting point for punishment.
    
    People suddenly changing lanes, sitting in one lane regardless of speed
    or traffic flow and the general lack of awareness that there are 2
    other lanes to the left that can be used at times other then joining or
    leaving the motorway are the most sado-masochistic members of the
    driving community. They obviously like to inflict pain and suffering on
    other road users and by sitting in either of the right hand lanes for
    hours like having pain inflicted on themselves with desperate motorists
    flashing lights and swearing in the hope that Joe Bloggs brain cell may
    be awakened by these actions.
    
            =====================================================
    Rt lane *****************************************************
    Middle  *              *              *                   *
    Left        *                                *
            -----------------------------------------------------
    
    The little driving formation diagram above can be seen being practised
    each and every day on motorways all over the country and it really
    makes me angry!!!#@#$@#$
    
    It's no wonder motorway pilesups happen and when they do I bet they
    start in the right hand lane - because thats where 95% of all the cars
    are.
    
    I'm sure the 'P' plate idea for newly qualified drivers is a good idea
    but I also think we need to introduce an 'M' plate to warn people of
    the fact that a MORON is behind the wheel. For MORON read Mr I'm doing
    70 so I'm allowed to be in the outside lane even if there's no traffic
    to my left for the next 3 miles so don't flash your lights at me pal.
    
    Well I feel much better for getting that off my chest.
    
    Gary :-)
    
    

	I think saying everyone should drive a motorbike or cycle before they
	drive anything else is crazy.

	My sense of balance is non-existant, I can't even pillion - and I've
	tried.

	I would cause too many accidents with car drivers trying to avoid me.

	Putting people on bikes or cycles, when they don't want to be there, is
	not condusive to saftey.
		
	Heather

>>My sense of balance is non-existant,

so do you fall over when you step out of your car ?


...art			;-)

She almost does when getting out of the TC in a tight skirt; has to be seen!!

Scott
;-)

Taking up on .15 and others - concerning lane switching on motorways.

What do people think of the US approach, where you stay in your lane, and
regard it as a separate road from the other lanes? With this system, you tend
to be undertaken as well as overtaken - which I found unsettling. However when
you get used to this, it's alright. Lane chopping is not a problem  (apart from
entry/exit time). 

BTW, things don't go any faster - you still have the same snarl-ups!

	I fall off a chair when I stand on it - unless I'm holding onto 
	something,

	I fall off an escallator which is going down, unless I turn around
	and face upwards, or hold onto someone.

	Balancing on two wheels, is an impossability.

	and, as already observed, getting out of the TC is definately 
	unbalancing!

	Heather

    re  some previous replies about UK driving standards
    
    In my limited driving experience abroard (FR, ITY, SP, BE, HL),
    I think our standards are similiar if not better !
    
    Rich (that should stir 'em up  ;-) )

>What do people think of the US approach, where you stay in your lane, and
>regard it as a separate road from the other lanes? With this system, you tend
>to be undertaken as well as overtaken - which I found unsettling. However when
>you get used to this, it's alright. Lane chopping is not a problem  (apart from
>entry/exit time). 
>
>BTW, things don't go any faster - you still have the same snarl-ups!

Having lived in the US 18 months now, and with a daily highway commute 
of around 60 miles...

I still prefer the British system. In Massachusetts (and indeed in most states) 
you are still *supposed* to stick to the slowest lane possible for your speed,
but this is widely disregarded due to the legality of overtaking on either 
side. What this means in practice on the dual carriageway (2 lanes each way) 
road I take to and from work is that a slow truck will be in the right ("slow") 
lane doing 50mph, and Grandma will be in the fast lane doing the same speed 
as the truck as she doesn't want to be stuck behind him. She won't move
over no matter how the traffic is building up behind her as she knows/thinks
she has a perfect right to be in that lane. So the traffic just builds up until 
either the truck or Grandma decides to exit.

Actually, to be fair, this behaviour is by no means restricted to old ladies.

Problems also occur when several lanes of traffic are travelling at about the 
same speed, and you suddenly see your exit appear (there aren't so many 
roadsigns as there are in Britain). You can't get into the lane to the right of
you, as they're travelling the same speed as you and no one will let you in.
You have to continue to the next exit (where there's probably no roundabout 
to help you get back onto the road...)

The advantage of the US system is that it is *usually* easier to change lanes,
and you tend not to get stuck in a lane you don't want to be in.

My feeling is that the US system is more prone to snarl-ups, as people tend
never to think that they are in the incorrect lane. On the other hand it might
just be the 55mph limit that is making everyone move that much slower...

John

    
    I agree that making people ride a bike would give them another 
    perspective but,as others have pointed ,it would cause untold
    carnage as "non-bikers" fell off the road every-where.I have a 
    simpler and safer alternative which I,thru no fault of my own,
    have actually put into practice.
     Normally I commute to work,mainly on motorways of around 80 miles
    round trip,and have been used in the past to travelling at reasonably
    high speeds.I`m not going to tell you what my personal driving habits
    are as it will start the usual "going over 70 is illegal"rathole but
    I was used to travelling at a comfortable speed,being able to slow
    down and speed up when ever I thought it warranted it.I was able to
    overtake when I wanted to and in what I consider relative safety.If 
    as I travelled along I saw that a car on my inside was gaining on
    another car in front of it I could courteously flash him out knowing
    that when he overtook the car he would wave me on with a cheery wave.
    If I came upon some slow moving traffic in the outside lane,it wouldnt
    bother me for I knew that as the obstruction cleared a slight
    depression on the throttle and I would again be zooming along the road
    again.(I dont sit in the outside lane by the way,I always use the
    inside if available)
        BUT THAT HAS ALL CHANGED !!!!!!!
    I`ve had my car stolen and I am making do with my girlfriends Astra
    Merit which is almost driving me suicidal.I never knew there were
    actually hills on the roads I use until I drove this car!!.Overtaking
    is now ,I think, a far more risky manouevre.If as you drive along at
    43 mph and come upon a car you want to overtake,you pull out into
    the overtaking lane and hit the throttle.The car immediately(after
    about two minutes)rockets to about 43.25 mph.I have`nt worked it out
    but it the overtaking time could be measured on a calender.
     The seats are brick hard,it doesnt even have FM Stereo,a cassette,CD,
    sunroof or even electric windows.This car is a chore to drive.
     What I`m getting at is that on motorways I`ve always wondered why
    people pulled out into the ouside lane so that they could travel 0.025
    mph faster,or why they were so irritable,why they got upset if
    something slowed them down(it`s cos it`ll take em two to three days to
    get going again..8*) ).BUT NOW I KNOW.......
     Maybe a way to make people more understanding on motorways is to take
    all the GTI,RS Turbo,GTE,SRI  (and of course the fastest of them
    all the Cavalier 1.6l) people and all the Astra merit,Yugo,Lada,Solara
    etc people and make them swop cars for a month.It really gives you an 
    insight into why people do things and may make you more understanding.
    Driving the Astra I don`t get annoyed when some 16v comes zooming up my
    tail, lights ablaze because I`ve been in his position before.I can now
    see both sides of the coin.
     Now to get this experiment off the ground does anyone out there have
    an RS Turbo (if it`s E680 WGG can I have it back please...8*)_)that
    wants to swap with my Astra for a month so that they too can have the 
    totally enlightening experience that I have had.
    
    (p.s. This would also stop me topping myself !!)
     .                                                 Dougie.
    
    (pps This is not a scam so I can get a replacement car till I get the
         new one in August.  8*)  )                                           
    

    A motorway is the quickest road between two traffic jams!!
    
    I think there should be more "automatic" speed detectors with cameras
    to detect speeders (not only on Mways), and "automatic" red light 
    cameras to detect jumpers and fines for these offences should be a Giro
    through the door with no need for a court appearance. 
    
    I think the speed limit on Mways should be raised to 80 (it's what 
    95% of car drivers do anyway) and the police should be VERY high 
    profile and come down like a ton of whatsits on dangerous driving 
    practices (such have been mentioned previously in this note, including 
    "lane-hogging").
    
    The funny thing is that these people doing all these crazy things are 
    .... people like you and me and the person in the next cube. Think on
    that!
    
    Noticed another extremely bad accident on M4 eastbound this morning
    between junctions 13 and 12. However, it's surprising there aren't more
    the way folk drive. Elaine is right, the main ingrediant missing is
    courtesy to others.
    
    Colin

    If you put the speed limit up to 80mph because "most people drive at
    that speed anyway". Then "most people" will drive at 90mph.
    
    
    Ian.
    

    re: .25
    
    I currently travel on average 70 mile per day on motorways and I can
    tell you that most people do travel at 90mph when they get a chance.
    
    Gary.
    

    
    re .23
    
    A good idea. Perhaps some of the high speed crowd ought to borrow my
    Marina for a while and feel how high the engine is revving at just
    55mph.  Then they  would understand why I can rarely go on Motorways,
    and why I am always holding them up on single-carriageways.
    
    Chris

	I think that a good majority of motorcyclists take unnecessary
	risks while in traffic and therefore are no better than	the car
	drivers.... How many times have you seen riders coming at you
	on the WRONG side of the road when their carriageway is full ?
	Or snaking their way between cars along narrow country lanes,
	just missing oncoming cars by inches ?

	Regarding the discussion about cars only using the outside lane
	of motorway. If you are in the outside lane and there is a queue
	of cars in front of you, there is no point in pulling into the
	middle lane. There must be someone right at the front of the queue
	holding everyone up, either because they are overtaking a vehicle
	in the middle lane, or because they are oblivious to the queue
	behind them.

	I hired an Uno recently and can agree with the reply a few back
	regarding non-powerful cars on motorway. Overtaking had to be
	planned seconds beforehand, and I didn't count the number of
	times I pulled out to overtake only to find that I didn't have
	the power. I could fully sympathise with the people behind me
	that could pass effortlessly. I have never realised how difficult
	it is to pull out of the inside lane !!!!!

		p1

    re -1
    
    I think your perception of what is dangerous and the risks take by
    motorcyclists is not correct.  Have a chat with someone who rides &
    drives.
    
    Rob

>>   <<< Note 1123.29 by OVAL::MACMILLANR "So many roads, so little time" >>>
    
>>    I think your perception of what is dangerous and the risks take by
>>    motorcyclists is not correct.  Have a chat with someone who rides &
>>    drives.
    
    How about when travelling in the two lanes on the motorway and the
    cyclist comes down BETWEEN the two lanes!!!
    
    Or the cyclist seeing all three lanes busy (but moving) proceeds to
    storm past on the HARD SHOULDER!!!!
    
    Richard

    re a few back - less powerful cars.
    
    I agree. It seems to me that the problem of lane hoggers is made
    worse by cars with poor accelleration, esp in the 60-80mph range,
    but having a high top speed - created by high gearing, which further
    reduces the accelleration !
    
    The manufacturers have created lane hogging cars !?
    
    Rich

re...


    Or the cyclist seeing all three lanes busy (but moving) proceeds to
    storm past on the HARD SHOULDER!!

...

I damn well hope not. bicycles are band on the M-way.

Simon ;-)

    
    Well, if all the cars were behaving properly they wouldn't need to
    would they?  :-)
    
    But seriously - there's idiots in/on all forms of transport, but from
    my limited personal experience, and from numerous friends and relations
    who ride bikes, the major danger to a biker is from 'bike-blind' car 
    drivers. The additional hight, manouverability, and acceleration 
    capabilites of a bike allow an experienced rider to safely carry out 
    what many car drivers would consider to be dangererous manoevers.
     

    
    When you ride & drive quick vehicles you see some fascinating
    differences in the attitude of other drivers.
    
    I've 2 wheelers & 4 wheelers that can reach double the speed limit
    in a track test. On the public road, the 2 wheeler is super at halving
    journey times when the average is around 30mph. The car is better
    if the average over 200 miles exceeds "a fast clip" - if only because
    it is comfortable, & doesn't need fuel every 120 miles.
    
    In common with most other motorcyclists, I prefer not to use motorways.
    For one thing, motorcyclists are less impeded on narrow A roads
    that drivers of wider machinery. For another, motorways are deadly
    dull on a motorcycle.
    
    However, when I do perambulate gently along the M4 on the Laverda,
    life is fraught. Backdraught from trucks moving at 70 mph, folk
    lane changing without signals, general inattention because teduim
    has set in on Radio 4, all cause m/c's to be at risk from other
    vehicles on motorways.
    
    In addition, if traffic is semi-choked, you can watch some drivers
    do all they can to stop a m/c passing. It's as though they are jealous
    of the mobility of the bike, as they sit & fume. 
    
    Shame, really. If I'm driving quickly in the tin box I get few
    of the same problems. Other drivers treat you as equal, rather than
    as an inferior being. It's still me, so why? BUT if you are driving
    a boy racer (Porsche 911T, Lotus etc) you can just the same behaviour
    as displayed towards m/c's -- hence my choice of boring colour,
    boring shape on my car. 
    
    Changing tack, must say I admire the French on autoroutes. Most
    people bang on a fair rate, virtually all stay in the right lane
    unless overtaking, people signal when they change lane, they return
    to the right lane as a matter of course as soon as posible. Even
    if someone is cracking on at over the ton, as many do, they always
    pull over for anyone moving quicker. Seems as though they are better
    trained in discipline than us -- the exception is often a Brit assuming
    he's still on the M25.                                            
    
    FWIW, I'm a fan of road pricing. I do 20k miles a year on m-ways,
    & get fed up with jams. Half is business, most of the rest thrashing
    to & from home in deepest West Wales. 
    
    What do the team think? What about some creative pricing policies?
    
    Starter suggestions :
    
    season tickets (say, in 2k or 5k increments)
    
    2x multiplier at key times on notorious bottlenecks
    
    5x multiplier for caravans between 0700-2100 hrs. 3x at all other
    times.
    
    Free for non-obstructors such as m/cycles.
    
    Most serious risk is that the people who lack discipline on m-ways
    will often be included in those who will switch back to A roads if pricing
    happens -- presumably then increasing the risk that the same
    indiscipline will cause greater problems/obstruction/injury when
    they are on narrower, curving, roads.
                              
    Colin

    I'd have said that a lot of people who lack discipline woild be able to
    afford to pay these charges, mainly because they are in company cars on
    business trips. 
    
    Charges on standard motorways are a bad idea...I couldn't afford to
    pay, and it would leave Mways for the rich and priveliged.  Perhaps
    these extra toll roads now being touted are an answer, but not charges
    for standard Mways.
    
    Mikef

    
    I would like to know why the "Company Car/Business Trip" has become a
    convenient scapegoat for "bad driving"...
    
    In my experience, it is these drivers whose style of driving, often
    fast, often agressive, that is also often far safer than the "Middle of
    the day Driver"...mainly because their reaction times tend to be
    quicker, and they are mostly expecting everyone else to be driving the
    same way.  The "MOTD" driver, tends to be locked in his little box,
    totally oblivious to everything around him/her !
    
    I am getting fairly sick of the "holier than thou" attitude of some
    people in here.  The best selling book of our time has a good message
    for you lot "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"...
    
    Can *ANY* of you say that you have *NEVER* broken a driving law ? 
    Speeding, parking, etc ?
    
    I have, and I expect to in the future, I am no saint, and I like
    driving, and I occasionally, when the road conditions permit, like
    driving fast.  I do not drive on a race track because it is a sport 
    that has been priced well out of my range, even just for a day !
    
    I also believe, that it is not my place to prevent anyone else from
    driving fast, although I do mutter to myself if they are not driving
    safely, and the two are *NOT* mutually exclusive !
    
    There, I've got that lot off my chest...no doubt it'll open up another
    wonderful rathole :-)

    I pay for my own transport, petrol,insurance its costs me loads, I care
    about what I drive because if I bend I have pay for it.
    
    How many people drive company cars care if they bend it???????
    
    
    Who feels the pain if a company car gets bent??????
    
    
    Garry

    I have a (personal) lease car, and I care for it ( I leave it a glass
    of warm milk and a cookie at night).  My attitude is that if my car
    gets bent, I will get bent with it, so I treat it exactly as if I owned
    it.  But thats just me.
    
    Mikef

    
    re .37   hear, hear!!!!
    
    How often do you hear "It's _only_ the company car" , "I don't care
    it's not mine anyway", "Well, I'm not paying for the petrol, so it
    doesn't matter"
    
    It's a well known fact that if you (and your money) are responsible for
    something, then it get's better treatment! 

    I have a lease car and I also treat it as my own , I wash and clean
    it as if it was mine , I find I build up a relationship with my
    car, I treat it as a friend.
    
    
                          KR
    
    

What a yucky car!

Sorry KR, but there must be something missing in your life if that's how you
feel about your car.

BN

    
    re .37
    
    >>     Who feels the pain if a company car gets bent??????
    
    I had a company car, and bent it. Got it repaired. Thought what
    a wheeze, nothing to pay except the excess (100 squids). Felt a
    bit guilty, but got over it.
    
    Then came the day I left the company and returned to the realms
    of the owner driver.
    
    Insurers rightly asked if i'd made any claims in the last five years,
    and bang went my no-claims discount.
    
     

    
    
    	I don't know how anyone can think "who cares about pranging my
    car" when they would be the person that gets pranged with it ? 
    I have a company car and it certainly gets as much respect as my
    other car... and further to that, look at all the other old heaps
    on the road, kicking out loads of pollution and dropping off rust
    when they go over a manhole cover... at least company cars aren't
    guilty of these offences !!                      
    
    ;-)

    
    No-one _wants_ to get hurt, but I'm talking about the general attitude
    of many company car drivers - the careless manoevering in car parks,
    opening doors against other cars, driving up kerbs etc to get round
    people waiting to turn right.......etc etc. There are people who treat
    their company car with as much respect as if it was ther own, and
    equally there are people driving round in rust heaps who've given up
    all hope of repairing it, but how many times do you hear the "it
    doesn't matter, it's not my money" attitude.
    

    
    
    RE: last couple.
    
       I do agree that some company car drivers have a 'grave' disrespect
    for their car, but they are usually the younger less inexperianced
    driver aswell. This leads me to the question : are more accidents
    caused by company car drivers or inexperieced drivers...?? 
    
       Having taken the Advanced Driving Test, My attitude may be construde
    as 'holier than thou' but I am genuinly concerned about road safety.
    The IAM along with RoSPA and many other groups seem to be more geared
    up to '"defensive'driving. This is driving to avoid having an accident
    ie: assume everything that can go wrong will go wrong and take action
    before it does.
    
       Back to motorways.. IMHO I think that the problems on todays
    motorways stem from days of old, when the lanes were affectionately
    known as 'slow', 'middle' and 'fast'. Many drivers on todays motorways
    seem to have the attitude/belief that when they are travelling at
    a speed inexcess of 69.9mph they should be positioned in either
    the middle or outside lane, irrespective of what is in lane 1. Can
    this really be classed as bad driving ?, or should it be classed
    as a bad understanding of the highway code, due to the way that
    they were taugh ? (when you were young did your parents call the
    three lanes of the motorway 1, 2, & 3 or Fast Middle and slow ?
    
      Alan.
    

    Slight aside...the IaM courses sound interesting and usefull from the
    replies here.  Do you think I should leave it some time before
    investigating. (ie - should I have driven for two years, or will 8
    months experience be ok?).
    
    Mikef

    
    Re: .45
    
    I don't think it's a misunderstanding of the highway code....just that
    some people don't bother to read it...
    
    How many people out there who passed their test more than a year ago,
    have bought and/or read an up-to-date highway code ?
    
    How many people still think that the speed limit for dual carriageways
    is 60mph ?
    
    IMHO, the basic trouble is, is that once the majority of people pass
    their driving test, their brains switch off and they think they know it
    all, without realising that all that test is, is a beginning !

    Example:
    
    
    	Last night going home on a 3 lane dual carriageway. 50 mph speed
    limit.
    
    
    I have just crossed a set of traffic lights in the centre lane having
    overtaken a lorry. A white car appears in my righthand wing mirror,
    passes me to the right, cannot pass the car in the 3rd lane so it pull
    across the front of me into the 1st lane , overtakes the car in front
    of me , pulls across the front of that car into the 3rd lane, passes
    the car in the middle lane, pulls accoss the front of that car into the
    1st . This has all been done faster that the speed limit and in about a
    mile in distance. At this point the is an off ramp , the driver of a
    car indicating to go down the off ramp is being good and not speeding
    so the white car can't wait, he pulls out into the middle lane to
    overtake the car being good, at this point the slower car is just
    turning down the off ramp. The white car speeds up cuts up the poor
    unsuspecting driver and speeds off down the off ramp.
    
    
    
    Is that just plain bad driving or misunderstanding the highway
    code????.
    
    Althought not on a motorway I have seen this kind of mindless driving
    on a motorway aswell.
    
    
    
    
    Garry
    
    
    

    I think a lot of the problems on motorways are due to drivers wanting
    to go too fast when the motorway is already at full capacity for a
    given speed. This results in the third lane bunching as they try to
    overtake, as their is no further lane to use.
    Also drivers have different ideas as to what is a safe distance between
    vehicles, and some people think that the capacity of a motorway
    increases as speeds increase.
    
    What some may see as centre lane hogging others may see as keeping a
    safe distance.
    
    My own opinions on speed limits are that it is time that we had
    variable limits on Motorways, after all we have seen a wide variation
    of suggestions put forward in this conference eg 80,90,100 mph.
    
    Haven't we got the technology yet, to have computerised monitoring of
    weather and traffic conditions, and be able to display a   compulsory
    maximum speed limit at 1 mile intervals.  These would not have to
    be completely variable but could be chosen from a given set, eg
    90mph  for clear and dry, 70mph for wet, 50mph for peak etc.
    
    Chris

    
    	re .48 (switching lanes, speeding down off-ramps)
    
    	;^), ;^)
    
    	Obviously there was enough space to pull this stunts as
    	nothing happened to anybody - so what's wrong with it ?
    
    	Perhaps he just got bored from day-dreaming people or he knows
    	this piece of track very well and gets a kick out of this off
    	ramp.
    
    	Personally I know some off-ramps which really inspire me to
    	use modern suspension technology for what its designed for and
    	a good entry speed is a must to have some fun - so the obstacles
    	(cars) standing (moving) in the way must be passed as quickly as
    	possible before they start doing weird things like braking IN the
    	corner, or using the whole lane width of the ramp thus breaking
    	my intended speed/line through the turn.
    
    	Why are so many people preaching bread and water, while everybody
    	knows there IS meat available and it tastes much better. Why don't
    	admit that it's much more enjoyable to drive more 'actively',
    	meaning using your skills, the capabilities of your car, reading
    	the situations and the road and enjoy it - why should somebody
    	voluntarily stay behind a truck or grandma, when there is a way
    	around it without hurting someone ?
    
    	I think instead of having rules that fit the Astra's (sorry, I just
    	picked that one) and weekend-drivers, there should be thought about
    	raising the standards of both drivers and vehicles (what do drum-
    	brakes and 'american' chassis still in today's cars ?) to allow
    	having more flexible rules/speed limits.
    
    
    	Guenter.

    
    RE -1 ......
                                 
    FLAME ON.....
     
    Who is this guy, is he from a different planet? Stupid or just a
    plain lunatic?                
                                  
    Sounds like somebody that likes to have fun by endangering the lives
    of other people needs reading a few of the rules of life.......
                                  
    Just remind me never to apply for ANY job that puts me within 100m
    of this danger to humanity....
    
    FLAME OFF....
    
    I thought that the modern car was considered to be a safer technology
    not because it lets you do more dangerous things with impunity,
    but because it affords more protection from the ineptitude of the
    driver.
    
    

    I read in the Daily Mail yesterday that as extra lanes are added
    to the M25 between now and 1996 , that the M25 will become a FREEWAY
    that allows overtaking onm the inside and outside lanes. 
    
    I hope that some instruction by the DOT is given on how to do this
    with saftey .
    
    
                             KR

    Re .-1
    
    Undertaking on the M25 will be allowed in conjunction with imposing
    a 50mph speed limit, according to the article I read on this
    subject.
    
    Incidentally, undertaking works well in USA (Massachusetts) where
    it is legal (at least on I495 and I93). It also works quite well in 
    S_France where it is illegal but accepted as "the norm".
    
    I therefore conclude that if it is legal, everyone knows it is likely
    to occur and is thus prepared for it, then it should not present
    too much of a problem to drivers.
    
    Ian
    

> re. Note 1123.48 by COMICS::COOMBER "It works better if you plug it in"
>    
>    I have just crossed a set of traffic lights in the centre lane having
>    overtaken a lorry. A white car appears in my righthand wing mirror,
>    passes me to the right, cannot pass the car in the 3rd lane so it pull
>    across the front of me into the 1st lane , overtakes the car in front
>    of me , pulls across the front of that car into the 3rd lane, passes
>    the car in the middle lane, pulls accoss the front of that car into the
>    1st blah blah

	In my opinion if the white car can pull into lanes on the left to 
	undertake, then the cars that it was undertaking should also be
	able to move left. Therefore it is they that are causing an
	obstruction.......Yes ? No ?

		p1

    

        I'm with .51 all the way.....
    

    Re .51 and .55
    
    I would just like to support both of these replies. I am glad that
    there are honest down-to-earth drivers contributing to this conference.
    I was beginning to think the whole thing had filled up with holier than
    thou, IAM, sunday afternoon, grandma, lane hoggers.
    
    Let's here some more from 'progressive' drivers. I enjoy the squeal of
    rubber on road and I'm sure there are plenty of others out there who
    do.
    
    Vroooom Vrooooooom.
    
    Gary.
    

    Go for it .51

    Re: Undertaking on the M25 et al
    
    It's interesting that this is only going to be allowed with a speed
    limit (50mph someone said?). This confirms my view that the overtaking
    on the right *only* rule is only logical on a non-speed restricted
    road.
    
    As soon as you impose a speed limit, there will come some condition of
    traffic density or flow patterns that will cause the rule to become a)
    unenforceable, and b) selectively disregarded.
    
    JK
    

     <<< Note 1123.59 by VOGON::KAPPLER "YOUR NAME HERE - Call 830-3605" >>>
            -< Off-side overtaking and speed limits don't add up! >-

>    It's interesting that this is only going to be allowed with a speed
>    limit (50mph someone said?)


If this view is based on the article in the Daily Mail.. then I believe
that the article actually said something along the lines of...
"undertaking on either side is allowed in the states where they
have a speed limit of 50Mph.. if we introduced this practice
here it would be much more dangerous due to our higher speed limit
.. but it would not be possible to have different speed limits
on the M25 to other motorways"

(if the paper hasn't been thrown out I'll see if I can
enter the whole thing here)
[EOB]


                                                                  

    Where the M40 northbound joins the M42 by Birmingham you already have
    the possibility of undertaking. Northbound M40 is 'injected' into the
    fast lane of the M42.
    
    This appears a simple enough maneouvre but I am staggered by the
    number of drivers who panic and slow too much (on the M40), thus
    "forcing" M42 traffic to undertake - there have been some spectacular
    jams from the accidents.
    
    If this is a foretaste of the UK drivers ability to handle new and
    unpractised driving conditions, then I shudder to contemplate legalised
    undertaking - although (as a fast and often frustrated driver) I favour
    it.
    
    Jay

    Re .61 - i have had the misfortune to use this junction - dumb ideas of
    our time no. 101.  Great if you have a large powerfull car, but a
    loaded Fiesta pop. trying to compete with cars travelling at 90+ was a
    hair raising experience I would not like to repeat.  Not that I was
    worrying, more the cars having to slow right down as they came up
    behind me, while I was waiting for a safe oppurtunity to travel to left
    hand lanes.  Now I join the 42 at the next Jn up.
    
    Mikef

    The point of the reply was not the fact that he had moved around lanes
    The point was that it was done at a speed greater that the speed limit
    for that stretch of road . Driving in that manner , room enough or not,
    pre supposes that everyone expects that style of driving and therefore
    will not be a danger to anyone. If the standard of driving was the same
    same across the board that would be fine.
    
    I personally do not find it exciting or in anyway cleaver to make
    tyre's squeel , try to achieve maximum speed around a bend or exploit
    the technological advances in modern car construction on public roads.
    This kind of activity is both dangerous to the driver and other road
    users. Public roads in the uk are no fit place to try this sort of
    thing , for a start the road surfaces is apalling. If you want to drive
    like that there is 1 place and 1 place alone to test or push a car to
    its limits, in a controlled environment OFF PUBLIC ROADS.
    
    I leave the squeeling tyres etc for the weekend on a race track. Its
    controlled , I expect other drivers to be driving fast and to 
    be wide awake. I do not expect a senior citizen to be wide awake and
    have reaction times as fast as mine, in the same light I would not
    expect to find a sunday driver on a race track. I am in no way the
    perfect driver , I make mistakes and exceed the speed limit. However I
    have 2 licences to protect , If I loose my driving licence I also loose
    my competition licence . 
    
    
    
    	Ask youself 1 question...........
    
    
     		Is it really worth an accident??????
    
    
    
    	Garry

    
    
    .....Right on .64, I'm with you. There are too many selfish b******s
    on the road. 

    
    Re  .last
    
    I certainly wasn't suggesting in my previous reply (to another topic)
    that roads were race tracks. And I would not expect to drive as
    if I was on a race track. 
    (Unless, of course, it was Monaco, Le Mans, Birmingham etc :))
     
    However, there's a big difference between the holier than thou
    attitude of those who claim to obey the speed limits wherever they 
    go and drive like saints (I know 'em - I've inspected their driving
    disabilities from behind for far too long).... 
    And those who like to take the opportunity of getting from A to B in 
    a respectable time.

    Richard.
    

    	Obeying the speed limits does NOT neccessarily indicate an OAP or
    Sunday driver.
    
    	Making your tyres squeal does NOT neccessarily indicate a budding
    Nigel Mansell.
    
    	There IS room for "spirited" driving on our roads at the right
    time, in the right place. IAM and RoSPA ENCOURAGE it - at the right
    time, in the right place.
    
    	I think the point is, and it has been made many times before, both
    in this conference and others, is that there is little to no respect
    for others' views. The OAP has as much right to drive at a speed suited
    to him/her as you or I have to throw it into a bend flat out PROVIDING
    that, in both cases, it neither inconveniences nor endangers any other
    road user. If you put it into the ditch that's your problem ; if you
    put someone else into the ditch through your inept or selfish driving
    then there should be some consideration of taking your licence away
    from you.
    
    Colin

    It was announced on the news last night, that the A1 is going to
    be upgraded to full motorway status by the end of the decade, at
    a cost of 65 million. Giving the North access to the European markets,
    no doubt!
    
    Richard.

    What is going to happen to all those drivers (that are not allowed to
    drive on motorways) that normally use the A1?
    
    Martin.

    The cost of conversion is 650 Million pounds, although the DoT admit
    that the total bill could well cost 1billion pounds.  Just think what
    BR could do to the Rail network with 650M, which is more that they get
    in subsidies from the Government at present.
    
    Mikef

>>    The cost of conversion is 650 Million pounds, although the DoT admit
    that the total bill could well cost 1billion pounds.  Just think what
    BR could do to the Rail network with 650M, which is more that they get
    in subsidies from the Government at present.
    
    Mikef
>>

most of the money reaped by the govt. from taxation of road going vehicles
is spent on things other than roads 


...art

    I imagine that spending the money on Rail would last a lot longer, and
    benefit more people that spending it on one road.  It is about time we
    started investinr in Public Transport, and tried to reduce the number of
    cars on the road.  
    
    Mikef

    RE .67 .....
    
    Yes I may well be driving home on the same road as you......
    
    I just get a bit brassed off at the attitude of those that treat
    the car as being of greater importance than people. It's people
    that sit in cars and get smashed up and mangled by the people that
    take too many risks. Anybody else can do what they like with their
    body...... the point that was being made was that other people have
    no right to endanger either me or the people I choose to put in my 
    car by their desire to behave like
    Fangio/Senna/Brabham/Moss/Nuvolari/Prost or whoever is current flavour 
    of the month.
                                  
    The number of times that I have been endangered on the A4 by those
    of the "must get infront of the next car even if it is unsafe" brigade
    is now getting beyond counting, and typically all it gets them is
    12' further up the road. 
    
    Lets get the car into perspective and take it down off its pedestal
    of adulation/worship....... it is nothing more than transport from
    A ---> B.

	Why oh why, do so many people have to drive with their $%@#@*!&
	fog lights on when it's raining?

	It's illegal. It's dangerous because it dazzles other motorists
	due to the glare through the rain. It's difficult to tell when the
	person in front of you is applying his brakes if there's a battery
	of high density red light already glaring through the spray, and front
	fog lights when there's no fog are dazzling to people coming the other
	way.

	It's almost as unnecessary as those idiots who insist on driving
	around with fog lights/long range driving lights on all the time
	because they think it looks *cool* and important.

	While I'm not in favour of the police hassling motorists for trivial
	offences, I think that mis-use of lights should actually be endorsable,
	possibly to be considered as dangerous driving.

	Angry of Hollesley (who drove up the M4 in the rain today).

    
    
    	Why do so many cars have miss alined headlights?????
    
    
    	Isn't that illegal too???????
    
    
    
    

    I sometimes drive with my foglights on in the rain.  I was recently on
    the M5 during heavy rain, when due to the spray it was impossible to
    see vehicles more than 25 yards ahead, EXCEPT FOR THOSE USING
    FOGLIGHTS.
    
    Generally, I believe that people who use foglights inappropriately
    should be first up against the wall come the revolution.  Their use
    during rain is not always inappropriate.
    
    John

    Re -1 no doubt you saw the fog lights as you overtook at 85 mph...:)-
    Speeding is also illegal & 95 % of motorists seem to do it. I totally
    agree that rear dazzle is infuriating but until motorists socially
    accept the danger it will continue to happen. Remember the early
    60's campaign of "dip don't dazzle" perhaps we should have a new
    version. Funny thing though if you repeat the exercise by putting
    on your main beam, the driver rear dazzling gets really shirty
    starts emergengy breaking, giving two fingers etc!!
    
    Richard

	Re .79

	Yes but how does the driver 25yds behind tell the difference
	between fog lights and brake lights under those conditions?

	Jonathan.

    > Yes but how does the driver 25yds behind tell the difference
    > between fog lights and brake lights under those conditions?
    
    The same way as in real fog, i.e. possibly with difficulty.  I assume,
    therefore, you'd like rear high-intensity lights banned completely?
    
    There is very little difference during daylight, between genuine fog
    and the mist thrown up during heavy rain on the motorway.
    
    In fact, I would hazard the opinion that they both consist of tiny
    droplets of water, and are therefore the same.
    
    Jeff.

	Ummm.... well firstly, no, I wouldn't like high intensity rear
	lights banned. They are useful, but in my opinion, only in fog.

	Secondly, I think there *is* a difference in the way the light
	transmits itself through fog or rain droplets; maybe it's
	something to do with the size of the droplets, but I find that
	where in fog a high intensity rear light is not dazzling, in
	rain it is. I would have thought they were designed specifically
	for the application for which they were intended. Perhaps I have
	particularly sensitive vision.

	I think in any case that I'm right in saying that it is illegal
	to use fog lights unless it's actually foggy, and there must be
	a reason for that. I have never heard of anyone offically
	recommending use of fog lights in rain, in fact I see to remember
	a series of "public awareness" tv ads on the subject which
	specifically cautioned against it.

	As far as all high density lights meaning "danger" is concerned,
	isn't there a difference between saying "Watch out, poor visibility
	but I'm in here somewhere" and "Watch out, I've just stood on the
	brakes"?

	I've just thought of another use for rear fog lights... flashing
	them at the driver behind you who's left his headlights on full
	beam ;-)

	Jonathan.

>>I have never heard of anyone offically
>>	recommending use of fog lights in rain, in fact I see to remember
>>	a series of "public awareness" tv ads on the subject which
>>	specifically cautioned against it.



You MUST NOT

-switch on rear fog lamps unless visibility is seriously (in italics) reduced
- RVLR No 23

page 69 highway code





...art

    Visibility can be seriously reduced in rain.  In situations like this I
    do what is SAFE (I dont want a 32 tonner ploughing into me) even if it
    might not be LEGAL.
    
    What with this debate, and the "thou shalt not speed" versus the "I'm
    gonna have FUN and screw the rest of you" debate, perhaps we need a
    HOLIER THAN THOU note.
    
    I have never made a single mistake in my long and auspicious driving
    career.  Everything I do is right.  The rest of you drive terribly. 
    You do everything wrong, and are not fit to share the roads with 
    me - in fact, no-one is, so there.
    
    
    ;-)
    
    
    John

>>perhaps we need a
>>    HOLIER THAN THOU note.

there is a MOANS conference

and a SOAPBOX one... 

have a whinge in one of them y'all


...art

	Re .86...

	You're right of course. I shall immediately hand back my driving
	licence and stick to public transport, where it's to be hoped I'll
	be less of a menace to other road users ;-)

	Jonathan.

	I cannot afford a 32-tonner just to have fun.

	So I tried to buy an old, used Leopard tank from the german
	army. It does about 120km/h on flat surface and has a shorter
	wheelbase than your 32-tonner so it should be more agile.

	I thought I could use this vehicle to educate "lane-hoggers",
	"in the corner breakers", "corner-cutters" on weekends ...

	But unfortunately my garage was not wide enough and the barrel
	of the gun would stick out too far over the pedestrian way.

	Considerate as I am, I didn't want to hurt harmless ped's running
	their head against my gun barrel.


	Any other suggestions ? .... 8*)

	Guenter.

You can borrow my Landrover, that tends to make _most_ people keep their
distance.

Although you do get some [censored] pratts try some [censored] stupid moves.


Like those who try and overtake you just as you indicate and start to turn
right.

Simon. (who will let almost anyone in front...)

    But what you've ommitted to say is that the subsidies have
    significantly reduced every year recently, and, that even this year
    BR's loss was balanced to profit by income from other sources (sale of
    redundant property, shop leases, etc.)

    
    
    Earlier notes talked about a profit by BR. The "profit" is only
    being created because of the subsidy. It is a notional profit. 
    As the loss reduces, so does the subsidy. Now, maybe the subsidy 
    level should be maintained and the "surplus" re-invested, but
    it is still not real profit.
    
    British Rail have been able to reduce the overall loss because:
    
    - earlier loans are being written off 
    - price rises
    - some cost savings
    - sale of assets
    - the InterCity service makes real profit
    
    
    But, the equation for the four BR businesses reads:
    
    Income - Expenditure = Huge Loss
    Huge Loss + Huge Subsidy + Sale of Assets = Miniscule profit.
    
    
    
    

    me too,
    
    
    plus the country does not pay the full cost of a road system ie
    cost of pollution/damage to ecology/lead in children/mental damage
    whilst using M25! etc etc
    
    .... although many of these chickens are now coming home to roost.
    
    Rich.

While arguing the cost of road vs rail subsidies, remember the cost of traffic
police, ambulances, emergency medical teams, and hospital emergency departments
that come out of income taxes and community charges. Also local councils have 
large traffic/highways departments that rely on central government grants 
and the community charge for funding. If this isn't a subsidy of sorts for 
motorists, I don't know what is. 

Rail accidents do happen, but there are far fewer injuries/deaths per 
passenger mile than there are on the roads. Also, rail traffic is regulated by 
BR and does not rely on local authorities to regulate traffic flows, etc.

John

    Also, this work on the A1 seems to be a short vision political
    decision, rather than part of an over road-policy.  And has anyone
    noticed that the A1 travels up into Scotland (Edinburgh?) - but the
    Mway will only travel to the North of England?  I guess we should be
    glad that its getting north of Watford.
    
    Mikef

    
    Why do traffic jams occur in the carriageway which doesn't have the
    accident in it? Is everyone slowing down to look?
    
    Last night coming down the M1 just S of Leicester, we were caught in a
    huge jam, and since a Police car, and a fire engine came down the hard
    shoulder, we assumed there'd been a bad accident, although the traffic
    was continuing to flow at walking pace. When we got the the accident,
    it was on the other carrigeway, and had not breached the central
    reservation. The traffic in our carriage then flowed smoothly again.
    
    We came off the M1 anyway, traffic was heavy, and we didn't fancy the
    M25 road-works - we cut cross country to Oxford, on good roads, and it
    was as quick as it would have been on an un-jammed M25. Next time we're
    racing at Mallory, I think we'll keep off the motorway completely!

    re .100
    
    is it a co-incidence that the dual carriagewy part of the A1 in
    Northumberland, and the limit of the motorway-ising, will be
    at just about the same point as the Berwick constituency starts?
    
    You know, the outpost that has returned a Liberal MP for years,
    and is now SLD (or whatever it's called this week.)
    
    Apparanetly, the story goes that Oxford got it's motorway (M40)
    years before Cambridge (M11) as more transport ministers had been
    to Oxford - But I dunno how true this one is!
    
    Peter.
    
    

Wow - nearly a year since i've driven on the M25 - you guys are crazy !

I always thought that people romanticised  their exploits on the M25 but now
I can see its all true. 

People cutting in to the space that you're trying to leave between you and the
car in front, nose-to-tail in the outside lane while it's clear in the inside
lane because no-one will get over, shunts and crashes and the conscequent
braking-look-see of the other drivers, lorries shredding tyres,...it's all
there to be seen.

Why don't you guys learn some lane discipline and make life easier for
yourselves ?

I really sympathize with anyone that uses that road regularly - your nerves
must be in shreds.

AMS

    
    _You_ may have the choice as to whether to use the car or not, but many
    people do not - public transport is not a viable option for many people.
    and it's no good saying "move house" - the concentration of 'industry'
    in certain areas make it impossible for all the workforce to live
    within walking distance of work.  

    
    This comes back to the discussion of Public transport V private cars. I
    think most people would agree that moving 100's of people on a train,
    or 50 people on the bus is more efficent in terms of fuel, and therefor
    reduced pollution, _BUT_ in order to persuade people to use public
    transport, it must run where and when they want it. To achieve a public
    transport system which is well used, and therefor could pay for itself
    must involve vast subsidies during it's setup. 
    
    As far as tolls on Motorways is concerned, the problem I see is that
    you may push a lot of the traffic off the motorway, and therefor, in
    many cases into the towns along the 'A' routes, so producing congestion
    in these places, leaving the 'fast' routes to the company reps, and
    more well off people. 

    Also don't forget the young, old, infirmed, ill, or not well off who
    just can't have a car.  I also think that we have to face the fact
    thatthe number of cars is increasing faster than the amount of
    'road-space' available for them.  The centre of Reading is a pain now,
    what will it be like in 10 years time?  I don't know what the answer to
    this problem is, but I suspect that Public Transport wuld be a key part
    of any answer.
    
    Mikef                                              

Theres an easy place to get the money from!

Just raise Road Taxes, and tax petrol more heavily!

Then subsidise Freight Rail, and build local rail->lorry depots.

Mark.

    Re: .98 "The A1(M) cost will only be spent once."
    
    I bet thats what they said when they upgraded the whole of the A1 to
    dual carriageway (and two-lane Motorway) in the 60s/70s.
    
    JK

    
    RE .103
    
>Wow - nearly a year since i've driven on the M25 - you guys are crazy !
    
    Sorry, no one in this conference drives like that. You must be on
    about another group of drivers. :-}
    
    Tony

    Where should this go?? 
    	Seen in Passing? 	Defensive Driving? 	Motorways?
    	Readings traffic?
    
    There is a difference in "local usage" at various junctions on
    different motorways.
    
    On the M4, eastbound, J11 at 8.45 the queue for the roundabout always
    extends down onto the motorway, and back for 1/2 mile. This totally
    blocks the inside lane, so the middle lane slows down, so people move
    to the outside lane, so that slows.... and about 1.5 miles before J11
    everything stops.
    
    
    Today I was on the M27, J5 (I think) at 8.45. Here the queue stretched
    back onto the motorway, and back passed the 3-line (/) sign.
    							/
    						    	/
    
    HOWEVER the motorway was hardly affected - as everyone who was turning
    off was queuing on the hard shoulder - hence leaving all the carriage
    way free for those going onto the rest of the motorway.
    
    Very impressive, and it made travelling past the queuing cars a lot
    safer.... 
    
    I also didn't see anyone cut in at the last moment - possibly because
    the motorway was travelling at 60+, so cutting in to an almost
    stationary queue would have been "interesting".
    
    Anyone know how to get this idea onto the M4??

    Before they widened the junction (M4 J11) at the top of the off-ramp,
    queues to exit were much more common than they are now.  And cars did
    queue on the hard shoulder.
    
    Since the flow at this junction got better, people got out of the habit
    of doing this.
    
    I'm surprised you find a queue at this point/time.  I've avoided the
    M4 (normal journey J13 -> J11) since the contraflow started, but up
    till then I never witnessed the problem at that time of morning.
    
    Jeff.

Which may explain why it is an uncommon practice!

Scott

    However, if you DO queue on the hard shoulder you may be done by the
    police. There is only one reason to be on there and that's an
    emergency. I remember many years back they actually did this on the J11
    off ramp. 
    
    The main reason that the middle lane slows down at J11 is all the
    ****** coming up the middle lane trying to cut off at the last mm. They
    find they can't and stop dead in the middle lane, the car behind
    swerves out to the outside lane, and the car behind him slams on and so
    on!
    
    Richard

    I've waded through the notes on motorways but cannot find any
    discussion on the scenario of approaching roadwords where one or more
    lanes are closed.

    For example you are travelling along in the outside lane overtaking
    slower traffic and you see a sign that the lane will be closing in half
    a mile.

    Do you -

    a) keep going until a convenient moment when you can indicate and pull
       in near to where the lane is closing.
    or
    b) immediately pull in to the inside lane and join the very slow moving
       traffic queueing for half mile.

    There are probably schools of thought for both methods, the police I
    understand do not advise the first method as it winds other motorists
    up that are already queueing in the inside lane. I must admit I have
    used the former method in the past as in my opinion if a lane is closing
    in 1 mile, half a mile or 800 yards it is still there to be used.

    - Roy

    I entirely agree that the lane being closed is there to be used.  But
    it should be used for drivers to find a convenient gap before the
    roadworks to pull into the inside lane(s), and not for the bloody
    minded who think they can carry on charging up to the cones and assume
    that someone WILL let them in.  If there are no gaps when you reach the
    roadworks what would you suggest doing ?
    
    	a)	stopping until a gap appears
    
    	b)	MAKE a gap
    
    	c)	get out and walk
    
    Surely encouraging drivers to filter BEFORE the obstruction is going to
    be a lot more efficient than all the above options.
    
    
    Shaun.

IMVHO:

The "lane closing in 1 mile" type notices are to warn drivers that the lane
is closing, and that they must move to another lane.  Drivers in this lane
should *immediately* adjust their speed to that of the adjacent lane (into
which they must pull) then at the *first* available gap pull into that lane.
The advance warning is to give drivers time to do this, and *does*not* mean
that they should continue in that lane to the last moment.

Drivers who speed down the lane-to-be-closed expecting to be allowed to pull in
at the last second are the very people who *cause* hold-ups at these hazards,
by forcing other drivers to brake sharply, hence the drivers behind them must
brake, and so on.  Why do they think they have some right to make faster
progress at the expense of other road users?

I can't verify the truth of this, but apparently some experiments were done
when the M25 was first completed.  It was found that just one car braking
sharply for some reason (eg from 70 -> 30) then speeding up and carrying on as
normal, caused drivers behind to slow down, then the drivers behind them, etc.
This bottleneck percolated backwards round a considerable distance of the
motorway before dissipating...

So sharp braking or other unexpected or "dangerous" manoeuvres (in which I
class trying to force your way into an adjacent lane at the last second when
yours closes) helps nobody, and just makes matters worse.  Smooth, considerate
driving is the order of the day, as expounded in para 1.  The warnings are there
to give drivers in the lane-to-be-closed time to react.  They should make sure
they show equal consideration for other drivers and allow plenty of time for
pulling over, to give the other traffic time to react and adjust smoothly.

Scott

This has been discussed elsewhere - I think it may be the defensive
driving note. 


Ian

    I am sure that this has been discussed elsewhere in this conference,
    but i will reply here anyway - i am sure Mr Moderator will move the
    last few replies to the correct place :-)
    
    The "1 mile" and greater warning signs are typically just the man
    testing his umbrella, thus all that you know is that somewhere ahead
    there is going to be some roadworks. It is only the last 800 yards that
    the actual hazard is described, eg narrow lanes, lane closing etc. In
    fact sometimes there is no hazard (apart from that caused by drivers
    expecting a hazard and slowing down)!
    
    It is all very fine to be a "good" driver, and pull into the left-hand
    lane at the earliest opportunity, but sometimes it is the LEFT-HAND
    LANE that is being closed. So this mile long snake of traffic now has
    to change lanes to the right, at which point the lorries (who in the
    case of the right-hand lane closing sit smugly in the RHL at the same
    speed as the LHL and block all overtaking) suddenly find themselves in
    a position to undertake all the traffic until the last minute then pull
    out just before the cones. IMHO this is even more dangerous than cars
    remaining in the RHL, as lorries take a lot more stopping, and drivers
    typically don't expect 32-tonners to be piling up the inside.
    
    The correct technique just HAS TO BE, use both lanes until you are
    actually aware of what the hazard consists of, but adjust your driving
    to take into account the new road and traffic conditions (as warned by 
    the umbrella signs). By the time you know what the hazard is, you
    should have adjusted your speed, position, gear etc to be able to 
    negotiate the hazard safely and without causing other drivers to
    unnecessarily change their speed, position etc.
    
    Note that i never actually said WHEN to pull in, this all depends on the
    infinite number of variable conditions that we all take into account
    every second that we are driving!
    
    Above all, be polite, smile and give a cheery wave to the driver who
    lets you in!
    
    mb

>>
Drivers who speed down the lane-to-be-closed expecting to be allowed to pull in
at the last second are the very people who *cause* hold-ups at these hazards,
by forcing other drivers to brake sharply, hence the drivers behind them must
brake, and so on.  Why do they think they have some right to make faster
progress at the expense of other road users?
>>

i'd agree with this, the most recent time this happened to me was on Monday
trying to get from M4 J13 to J11; warnings that the rhs lane would close
(contraflow). The traffic in the centre lane (& lhs lane) was stationary for
about a mile whilst people were zooming down the rhs lane with the knowledge
that they had a god given right to jump the queue & intimidate drivers into
making way for them. This occured for about 30 minutes or so, & I was sitting
absolutely stationary on the M4. Until a transit van driver moved from the
centre lane and into the rhs lane to effectively block other cars zooming down
to the lane closure. It was precisely at that point that cars in the other two
lanes started to move. I wish I had the bottle to do something like that, but
it seems to be a dubious thing to do, besides I'm a wimp.

Drivers that 'jump' queues in this way seem to prey on the good nature of other
road users, and possibly even encourage other drivers to drive badly.


...art

>> Don't dream it, be it

Been to see Rocky Horror, have we sir?  Does sir always dress like this when
driving?  If you would just blow through this tube, try not to get lipstick on
it...

Scott
;-)

hey! leave off my pn. Scott, or should i say Dr. von Scott ???

i'll have a go at yours when i remember the name of The Kinks lead singer


...Frank

Ray Davies

...I'll be impressed if you guess the new one!

Scott

	The lane closures warnings usually tell you which one is closing.
	I don't make a move until I know which one.  Then, if I'm in it, I
	get out of the closing lane at a convenient time (no last minute
	swerving).  I also let people in in front of me as they realize that
	the lane's gone.  Many people leave it too late, not just through
	ignorance (ie bad manners) but through lack of decent observation.

	Dave

    re. 124
    
    Fairground Attraction ?

Yes.

Rats, I'll have to think of another one now...

    Has anyone seen these @#$%$# convoys on the motorways????  An enormous
    line of vehicles (like, very long) all driving nose to tail in the left
    hand lane, not letting anyone in to either enter or leave the
    motorway!!  Phrases such as mindless stupidity spring to mind.  Along
    with others.
    
    Mikef

    IMHO:
    
    Surely if we have 3 lanes open, and a sign saying 1 is closing in x
    miles then we should use ALL AVAILABLE LANES until it is necessary not
    to use one of the 3.
    
    Take this example, on a one mile stretch of motorway. Given, that in
    this mile stretch 100 cars can fit in each lane. That means 300 cars
    can travel down this stretch. 
    
    Ok so if we put a sign at the beginning of this mile stretch saying
    that at the end the 3rd lane will close we have 2 options.
    
    Everyone, lemming like, pulls into the middle lane. This then means
    that only 200 cars can travel down this stretch, so where do the other
    100 go? In a queue! Hence jams build up.
    
    
    OR we can use all 3 lanes, and filter into the middle lane at the end,
    thus the jam is kept to a minimum.
    
    Drivers who sit in the outside lane, keeping pace with the middle lane,
    and leaving a mile long stretch in front of them are:
    
    a) causing an even bigger jam
    b) playing god
    c) irritating all drivers behind them
    d) as a result of all this probably going to help cause accidents.
    
    I've seen 2 dangerous situations caused by this.
    
    The first, a lorry was in the outside lane, blocking it a good few
    miles before it actually closed. The guy behing was fuming mad and
    eventually overtook the lorry by driving on the middle reservation in a
    cloud of mud and dirt!
    
    The second, another lorry pulled out, the guy behing nipped into the
    gap left by the lorry, pulled in front of the lorry and carried on!
    
    I think fools that do this should be breaking a law,and liable to
    prosecution.
    
    
    Greg

To comment on HHO in .129:

State 1:
3 lanes open, cars at 70mph in each, travelling 69 yds apart (ie 2 second gap:
if you're closer than this what the hell are you doing on the motorway?)
=> in 1 mile there are 25 cars per lane, total 75 cars.

State 2:
Filter down to 2 lanes, at 50mph in each, 48 yards apart (ie 2 second gap)
=> in 1 mile there are 37 cars per lane, total 74 cars.

One car difference will not cause a traffic jam.  If people use the advance
warning to smoothly make the transition from state (1) to state (2), then
jams are avoided.  I still maintain the jams are caused by people trying to
push in at the last second.  I do not suggest moving over as soon as you see
the sign saying the lane closes in a mile (or 800 yds, or whatever), but at a
point when it is convenient and safe and does not hinder any other road user.

Scott

    Re: .130
    
>State 1:
>3 lanes open, cars at 70mph in each, travelling 69 yds apart (ie 2 second gap:
>if you're closer than this what the hell are you doing on the motorway?)
>=> in 1 mile there are 25 cars per lane, total 75 cars.
>
>State 2:
>Filter down to 2 lanes, at 50mph in each, 48 yards apart (ie 2 second gap)
>=> in 1 mile there are 37 cars per lane, total 74 cars.

    Sorry,
    
    75 cars at 70mph DOES NOT EVEN NEARLY EQUATE TO 74 cars at 50mph!!!!
    
    Try a capacity of 75*70 (5250) equating to 74*50 (3700)!!!!
    
    If your argument held true then we would all be travelling along single
    carriageway motorways at 25mph!!!!!!
    
    mb

    
    	RE: .129   
    
    	So we've got 3 lanes,  we're all driving at 60.  Assuming we're not
    going to start driving closer,  then the only way the same number of
    cars can get into 2 lanes is to speed up to 90.   
    
    	Ideally they would shut the second lane and we could all drive at
    180.   Queueing Theory is wonderful,  there's a book on it in the
    DECpark library.

I didn't say (I don't think) that the capacity remained the same.

Consider 3 lanes at 70mph suddenly trying to become 2 lanes at 50mph at the
point where the lane closes:

87 cars arrive at this point in a minute; only 62 can leave it.  So there is
obviouly going to be a hold up.

However, if the preceding mile is used as a "buffer" so that cars gradually slow
down and gradually filter into two lanes, there's no need for 25 cars per minute
to suddenly find there's no room for them to proceed: my whole point is that
you can fit all the cars from 3 lanes at 70mph into 2 lanes at 50mph without
the need for anyone to go slower than 50.  Obviously if the motorway is
very crowded, the buffer may need to extend back further.  It is the drivers
who refuse to do this and steam on ahead regardless who cause the system to
break down.

ie it only works with perfect drivers and how many of them are there!

Scott

    re .129-132
    
    If you have three lanes of vehicles with 2 second spacing then the road
    is carrying 3/2 vehicles per second. If you then go to 2 lanes and want
    to carry the same amount of traffic you have to space the vehicles at
    1 1/3 seconds apart.
    
    The speed of the traffic does not affect these figures, although it is
    safer to drive slower when the gap between vehicles is less than 2
    seconds. However if the traffic is going too slowly then you will not
    be able to get a vehicle every  1 1/3 seconds, unless they both occupy
    the same bit of space at the same time (some people attempt to do
    this!).
    
    Andrew

    All this math is giving me a headache ..........
    
    The fact remains that if one lane (the one with impending closure) is
    vacated before it closes, then there will always be someone who, either
    by intent or enforced circumstances, will use it and end up ahead of
    the other traffic.
    
    However, if we all use all the lanes, and then merge is a disciplined
    fashion when the closure is upon us, far less people would feel
    aggrieved.
    
    (I recall someone mentioning the German "zipper" road sign indicating
    the traffic should merge on a 1 by 1 basis (in queues?). Sounds like
    just the thing to educate everyone to abide by.)
    
    In traffic queues, I believe the above process as far more staisfcatory
    than merging early.
    
    JK's HO!

    The System used on the Continent (I have seen it in operation in France
    and Germany) works. It is very simple, as well as putting up signs
    advising of the lane closure, they put up no overtaking signs. Assuming
    everyone behaves, (it works best in Germany) you get all three lanes
    travelling at the same speed BEFORE they merge. It also makes in
    illegal to nip to the end of the queue and force your way in.
    On the occasions that I have seen this in action, it all went very
    smoothly, nothing like the chaos we get in England.
    I am convinced that it is the B'stards that think that they are more
    important than everyone else, and who beleive they have the right to
    push in at the front that cause all of the problems, purely because
    people (in the lane that is already slowed to accept the volume) hat to
    hit the brakes to make space for them.
    Whenever someone tries it on me I take great delight in pushing them
    into the cones. (Her majesty didn't pay for my driving instruction
    - Track Laying Vehicle Steered by its Tracks - for nothing) :-)
    
    Rob
    

    I would love to get involved in this discussion, but having been through
    it in the Defensive Driving note, I don't have the energy.
    
    I have read that the M40 is fully open from the afternoon of 
    Wednesday 16th.  I happen to be driving from Warrington to Reading on
    that afternoon.  Anyone know what time it's likely to open?
    
    Also, what route should I take from the M40 to Reading? 

>>    I have read that the M40 is fully open from the afternoon of 
>>    Wednesday 16th.

Is that all the way from Oxford to Warwick/M42 wherever?

>> Is that all the way from Oxford to Warwick/M42 wherever?
    
    Yes, from the M42 to London.

Zowie, that should really speed up the trip to my Grandmother-in-law
in Brum. I *hate* the A34 north of Oxford.

Steve.

    I thought the M40 was still closed north of Oxford?  I travelled from
    the Banbury end northwards in October, and I can't imagine that mess being
    turned into an Mway by now!
    
    Mikef

The Local Radio (FOX FM says that its opening on Wednesday)


Jc

    
    Not open last Thursday -- but there were some cars on the unopened bit.
    
    Major write-up on the area covered by the new part in the Sunday Times.
    Apparently there is an 80 mile gap between services, so they were doing
    a guide to convenient facilities.
    

    
    However road works (caused by problems when the drying concrete
    cracked) require lane closures "immediately". Trucks/large loads are
    recomended to use the M1/M6 rather than the M40 until the problem is
    fixed...
    
    /. Ian .\

.145>> However road works (caused by problems when the drying concrete
.145>> cracked) require lane closures "immediately".

The same thing happened in 1985 when the Leatherhead section of the
M25 opened.

	I have to say that I can't understand all this talk about motorway
	traffic having to be forced into two lanes...

	On most of the motorways I've been on, there's only traffic in the
	two outer lanes anyway. Anybody seen driving in the inside lane is
	altermatically labelled a wimp!! :-)  ;-)

Re: .129

>    The first, a lorry was in the outside lane, blocking it a good few
>    miles before it actually closed. The guy behing was fuming mad and
>    eventually overtook the lorry by driving on the middle reservation in a
>    cloud of mud and dirt!
    
If this was a 3-lane carriageway the lorry was breaking the law as HGVs are
restricted to the two leftmost lanes.  If this was not the case then the
person who was so utterly stupid as to drive on to the central reservation
should have been severely dealt with.  People must learn to be patient and 
not get annoyed if their favourite path is blocked.

jb

I haven't got time to learn to be patient!

 Well, the easy route to describe is M40 -> M25 -> M4.

 

 		 Mr helpful.
		~~~~~~~~~~~~


  The opening of the M40 should help my journey up to Preston, it will cut out
the M25, M1 and part of the M6, which can't be a bad thing. Can it????


		 Alan
		~~~~~~

>A43 to Oxford. Then A34 and M4 to Reading or take the Wallingford, Pangbourne

I heard on the radio this morning that the A43 is now the A34....


What does that make the A34 ??

;-)

    
    the stretch from Stratford Upon Avon to the M42 has been renumbered the
    A3400. I presume the stretch from Oxford to Stratford will similarly
    gain a couple of zeroes.
    
    They are predicting an 80-90% reduction in traffic on this road...
    
    /. Ian .\

    
    Has anyone been on the 'new' M40 yet? I've got to drive up to
    Birmingham on Saturday, and was wondering whether to try it.
    
    I was going to be 'green' and go by train, but I can't get back to
    Reading before mid-day on Sunday, if I don't leave Birmingham before
    8.40pm on Saturday night - unless I spend half the night wandering
    between Euston and Paddington (And it would cost me a lot more on the
    train)   So much for public transport.   

I have to travel from West London on Saturday (depart about noon) up to
Padiahm, near Burnley in Lancs.  Would the "traditional" M1/M6 be better than
the new M40?  Which is the shorter, in distance and estimated time?

Scott

    
    I went up to Birmingham (from Reading) on Saturday morning, it took
    less than 1.5hours, (usually about 2 on A roads), BUT - if you use it,
    watch your speed! It's very easy to let your speed creep up, since it's
    a good surface and  relatively quiet. I saw at least 5 cars pulled
    over, three by maked police cars, one by a Jag, and one by a Sierra!

    Re-1
    
    Which Junction did you use to get on/off the M40?  I went up on Saturday
    morning also, getting on  (coming from Reading) at Jn7, which is quite
    easy to reach.  Jn7 does not exist Southbound tho'.
    
    Mikef

    
    I went up the A34, (to Oxford) which now continues up as far as the M40,
    I'm not sure which junction number it is, but it can't be 7, as I got
    off there on the way back! :-)
    
    Elaine

    I know where you mean, but you must have got off at 6 on the way back,
    coz' 7 isn't there southbound!!  6 leads you back on a B road to just
    north of Wallingford.  An interesting route...
    
    
    Mikef

I travelled back from Staffordshire on Sunday evening on the M40 and was very 
impressed with the lack of traffic compared to the usual M6/M1 mess. We missed
all of the M6 by travelling from Lichfield on the M42, then M40 and cut down
on the A423(M) by Maidenhead to get to the M4 and on to London. It took about
2.5 hours which is at least an hour shorter than the usual Friday night/Sunday
night journey times.

Nigel

    
    I didn't go on any B roads, it was M'way dual-carriageway all the way

    Re -2
    
    Couldn't agree more. We did a Croydon-NEC trip on Sunday, and it saved
    around 30 miles eachway.
    
    Also - leaving the NEC area at 4.30ish, we were back home by 6.30pm.
    Not bad at all, but lots of jam sandwiches around.
    
    Paul

Well, guess what I tried the new M40 at the weekend too.  Didn't have Elaine's
problem of going too fast; foot to the floor in the Metro yields 85, as long as
you're going downhill with a trailing wind!  Saw very few police cars, either
marked or plain.

The "old" M40 is a mess, with cracked concrete and contraflows, but beyond
Oxford it's very good.  Mind all the stone-chips left behind by the constructors
though; I managed to crack a headlamp lens and a couple hit the windscreen
rather noisily!  Didn't like joining the M42 in the outside lane, but the
road signs and markings have been improved so you'd need to be a complete
idiot not to know what to expect...

Scott

    One thing I've noticed on the M3 lately that's puzzling me.
    
    To signal the end of lane closures or speed limits the amber signs in
    the central reservation always used to show a circle with a line
    through it. Then a while ago I noticed that it showed "End". 
    Recently it seems to have reverted back to the circle again.
    
    Is there a subtle difference ?
    
    Roy

I would have thought the early signs were too primative to display a
shape as complex as 'End.'  I think it is a great improvement as I
always used to think  the circle with a line through it looked like an
old-fashioned computer zero and *should* mean a maximum speed limit of
0 miles per hour... :-)

I have no idea why they've reverted to the old style - that seems a
backwards step to me.

Jon

    Personally I'd prefer the Circle with the line through it, I find the
    word "End" a bit indistinct until one is right on top of it (no I don't
    need new glasses !).  Also, although most nationalities understand the
    word it's hardly multilingual is it ?
    
    .Stevie. (in the NW where they've been using "End" for at least a year)

Re: .-2

	Could it be:
      +-------+                      +-------+
      |       |                      |       |
      | | | T |         =>           |  End  |
      |       |                      |       |
      +-------+                      +-------+
and
      +-------+                      +-------+
      |       |                      |  ,-/  |
      |  50   |         =>           |  |/|  | (End of restriction)
      |       |                      |  /-'  |
      +-------+                      +-------+

can't say with any certainty, I haven't had the presence of mind to check...
too busy avoiding the cause of the problem (and the gawpers...)

 	Ian.

    I think this is meant to be a reply to #1123.
    
    Love the diagrams.
    
    - Roy

    Can anyone on the panel answer this?
    
    What do to amber studs on a motorway signify? Where are they placed, on
    the RH or LH edge of the carrigeway or or are they on slip roads?
    
    Dave
    

    
    	The studs are for when the weather is really bad e.g fog.
    There are red ones as you approach the motorway exit,or entrance,green
    ones on the other lane borders,and amber ones on the RH side(overtaking
    lane)They really do help.
    
    	Andy....(the other stud on the motorway).
    

    re .-1
    
    Not quite I think.
    Amber on the right.
    Red on the left except at entrance/exit where the red change to green -
    to highlight where you can cross.
    White between "standard" lanes.
    
    Andrew

    
    	Andrew,
    
    	I'll check the stud colours on the way home.
    
    	RE:-<Now which quiz was it where this was a question? >-
    
    	Was it on you driving test????
    
    	(It was on mine)
    
    
    		Andy...
    

    Thanks guys.
    
    If I win I'll send you a large drink.
    
    Dave

    I thought all learner drivers were banned from motorways but
    what about HGV learners ? 
    
    I ask as I followed an HGV learner onto the motorway today. 
    
    Royston

re .last,

I guess that HGV learners probably hold a full driving licence for
other vehicles, so perhaps that's a way of bypassing the rules...?
Pure speculation, as usual!

Chris.

    Check the blue/white signs as you join a Mway, I think it says "No
    learners except HGV"