Conference terri::cars_uk

   <<< Note 1108.0 by SIEVAX::CORNE "This Space Intentionally Left Blank" >>>
                     -< Minimum Speed Limit on Motorways? >-

There maybe no such thing as a Minimum Speed Limit on Motorways...
but the police can (and DO) stop people driving too slow
on the motorway!

(The police stopped my mother on the M4.. doing (acording to them)
25 MPH.. they warned her about being too slow)

    I know a motorway in Ticino (Switzerland) where there is a 80kph
    minimum speed limit (with signs). This motorway goes through mountains
    and I can understand their point (get rid of 2CV, Fiat 500/126)
                                    
    In France there is also a minimum speed limit on the fast lane,
    when the road is dry, for automobiles only, ... etc ... It's only
    written in the books and I think it's 80kph also. I don't see the
    reasoning too clearly: either the traffic is jammed and the speed
    limit is useless or the traffic is free and you better get your
    2CV or Fiat 500 out of the way QUICK ! ....    :-)

    
    There is one (sort of) already...
    
    You are not allowed to take a vehicle on any motorway unless it is
    capable of sustaining 50 mph...
    
    this sort of implies a minimum speed limit...

	Memory suggests that there's a minimum 30mph on Motorways.

	-John

    Sounds like the real problem is the clowns who stop to look at the
    interesting 1930s type car, rather than the car itself.
    
    Steve

>	Memory suggests that there's a minimum 30mph on Motorways.

Well how many tickets get issued on the M25 in "rush" hour?

John

    The idea of a minimum speed (60 mph?) for the fast lane appeals as a
    separate issue to the problem of the basenote. IMHO it's becoming far
    too common for people to race up the inside and middle lanes 'cos
    everyone else is sat in the outside lane!   That in itself isn't too
    bad, its cutting back into the outside lane that I've seen some
    horrific examples of.

    Mind you, enforcing such a rule would be just as difficult as enforcing
    the no-overtaking-on-the-inside rule without some sort of automated
    photographic evidence for both.

    Peter    

    I'm very much in favour of the "pass on any side" system like they 
    have in most states in the USA. Makes the jammed "fast lane" problem
    irrelevant.
         

Re .8:
  I agree, when I was over there I was very comfortable with that kind of
  regulation... but then again I always check my nearside mirror and *look*
  over my shoulder before moving back - smug huh :-)

  Anyway, my question is - do they still make cars with a single mirror on
  the offside??? I seem to remember a few years ago seeing cars with a single
  offside mirror which at the time I thought would lead to lazy mirror
  checks.

  Andy

The law only requires you to have an internal rear-view mirror and an offside
external mirror.  Until the law is changed making nearside external mirrors
compulsory, they'll continue to make cars without them.

Scott

    There is no blanket minimum speed on Mways, also the police can't
    do you for going too slow on an Mway ...
    
    Marc

    Yes they can. It's called either "Causing an obstruction" or "Driving
    without due consideration for other road users"
    
    They certainly do it on the M5.

    Ok it's a fair cop - I should have said:  per se.
    
    Marc

    a few years back a milkman got done for doing 28mph on a motorway
    in his milkfloat
    - I pretty sure that the minimum speed figure quoted was 30mph.
                    
    Nigel.

>- I pretty sure that the minimum speed figure quoted was 30mph.
                    
    There definitely isn't a blanket min. Nigel, apart from the fact
    that you won't find it in the HC, I have this straight from a traffic
    cop.  You can't get done for *not* breaking speed limits!  :-).
    
    Cheers
    Marc
    
    'It's 200 miles to go and we're wearing shades.  Hit it!'
    

    

RE. Previous note.

The minimum speed limit on motorways IS 30 MPH. And it is in the 
Highway code.

*8^)

	I am absolutely, totally, incontrovertably and utterly sure
	that there was a minimum speed limit for motorways and I think
	it was 30mph.

	I don't think there are that many prosecutions, and perhaps, but
	most unlikely, it's been dropped.

	-John

    What are you charged with???
    
    Loitering???
    
    
    Ian.
    =8*)

    
    Re. .2 and others. There is, as we all know, NO such thing as a
    "Fast lane" on a Motorway, or a "slow lane". The use of these terms
    is partly responsible for the queues in the "third lane" and
    perpetuating the mith that only HGVs and whimps use the inner lane.
    
    To get back to the point about minimum speed limits - The reason
    there is a maximum speed limit, and the reason that HGVs are baned from
    the third lane, is to reduce the DIFFERENCE in speed between the
    slowest and fastest vehicles. The biggest problem is caused by those
    who grossly exceed the maximum limit. It is also dangerous to drive
    at 30 on a road where the average is 80 I agree. I will be looking
    in my Highway Code to see if it says anything about minimum speeds
    on motorways. I don't remember ever seing a reference to minimum
    speed on any road. Driving too slowly is a failure point on both
    the normal and advanced driving test. What happens to the minimum
    speed limit in very poor visibility. Maybe a minimum speed limit
    is to blame for the fact that most drivers drive too fast in the
    fog, or near any other hazard?
    
    Ian. (Who next step is the RoSPA Advanced Test)
    
    

    Hey, I didn't realise that HGVs are banned from the third lane...does
    that rule not apply to the M6 then???
    
   Mikef

My understanding is that any vehicle which has only side mirrors to get a 
rear view is banned from the third lane. This is why HGV's are banned, but
coaches are not.

The maximum speed for HGVS's on motorways is 60 :-)

I always believed that a vehicle which uses a motorway has to be capable
of maintaining at least 20mph, unless it has special permission (ie
exceptional loads with police escort). This always struck me as quite
low, since many cyclists can keep up 20mph. Although it would be very 
dangerous for them to use the motorway itself, if they were allowed to
cycle on the hard shoulder it would be much safer than using any other
70mph dual carriageway!

	Craig.

    < Note 1108.17 by IOSG::WOODS "Martin Woods" >

>The minimum speed limit on motorways IS 30 MPH. And it is in the 
>Highway code.

    No it *isn't*, and no it's *not*.  
    
    If it *is* in the HC, what section is it in?
    
    Btw, is this the 5 minute argument, or the full half hour?  ;->.
    
    Cheers
    Marc 

    < Note 1108.18 by VANILA::LINCOLN "The sun has got his hat on" >

>I am absolutely, totally, incontrovertably and utterly sure
>that there was a minimum speed limit for motorways and I think
>it was 30mph.

    Well maybe there *was* one at some time, I seem to recall some years
    back when the max. speed limits on different classes of roads kept
    being switched - due to the oil 'crisis' was it? - not having a
    car at the time, and not driving much, I was never quite sure what
    the *max.* speed limit on Mways was .... :-)
    
    A bit academic this 30 thing for me actually, I'm much more likely
    to get done at 3-4 times that!
    
    Cheers
    Marc

    

>-< Too fast as bad as too slow? >-

    Absolutely!  Large speed differantials kill just as surely as absolute
    speed does.

>on motorways. I don't remember ever seing a reference to minimum
>speed on any road.
    
    There are minimum speeds on some - specific - roads.  There is a
    road sign that indicates the min. speed.  I *think* the Dartford
    Tunnel might have one for example, though it's years since I went
    through, so am not sure.
    
>Maybe a minimum speed limit is to blame for the fact that most drivers
>drive too fast in the fog, or near any other hazard?
    
    Only a fool would *not* ignore such a speed limit in such conditions.
    
    Cheers
    Marc

    < Note 1108.1 by VANDAL::BAILEY "BX Turbo drivers do it with woooosh" >
                  -< We need a minimum *_IQ_* for motorways >-

   <<< Note 1108.0 by SIEVAX::CORNE "This Space Intentionally Left Blank" >>>

>(The police stopped my mother on the M4.. doing (acording to them)
>25 MPH.. they warned her about being too slow)

    That's what the police usually do in such cases - give a friendly
    warning.
    
    Is it really good policing to *do* people for going to slowly?
    
    I'd say, reasonably glibly, no, not most of the time at least.
    
    Cheers
    Marc
    

    Last year a guy who drove by habit at 10 mph EVERYWHERE, including
    motorways, had his license revoked for dangerous driving, as I recall.
    
    

>Last year a guy who drove by habit at 10 mph EVERYWHERE, including
>motorways, had his license revoked for dangerous driving, as I recall.

    <grin>, it doesn't sound a terribly good way to drive.
    
    I thought that the offence of dangerous driving no longer existed
    though?  Isn't there reckless driving or driving without due care?
    
    Cheers
    Marc

    
    vehicles towing anything are supposed to be banned from the right lane
    of a motorway as well...

                        
    The point about speed differentials is important to remember...
    
    A head on collision on an A road might have an impact speed of 100mph,
    both cars travelling at 50mph.
    
    To get this sort of impact on the motorway you have to leap the armco
    or wind up the revs and drive round the M25 searching for stationery
    straffic.
    
    Personally I feel a lot safer on the M'ways, and as for those that
    drive on them at 30 or other such low speeds, I suspect that these are
    the sort that are likely to cause an acident where ever they are.
    
    
    Bill.
    
    
    P.S. If you don't have the time to waste driving round the M25 looking
    for stationery traffic, I'd recommend the A34 between Chipping Norton
    and Woodstock. This is particular favourite for those who like spending
    their time on the wrong side of the road  despite the abundance of
    unbroken white lines. I understand that the boys in blue have cottoned
    on (probably due to the amount of serious/fatal incidents), so if
    you're up that way keep an eye out for the red sierra/white carlton
    parked in the lay-by's. I'm sure if you look closely enough you'll spot
    those interesting blue spot lights. 
    
    
    PPS. They have also brought in a 50 mph speed limit an this stretch,
    which they're quite keen on.

    Re HGV Speeds on Motorways
    
    There seem to be fewer HGV drivers observing the 60mph limit on
    the M-Ways than the suicidal maniacs who exceed 77mph (allowing for
    the possible 10% speedo error).
    
    And now to a controversial point...(probably discussed elsewhere?).
    
    It seems to me that most of the fast-lane morons are driving company
    cars which they don't really foot the bill for whatever happens,
    and many are subsidised in terms of the petrol consumption (indeed,
    quite a few don't even pay for their petrol).                     
    What do you think ?
    Does no one keep the law on the roads? If not why not ?
       
    I know I break it from time to time (even if involuntarily!)
    
    Tim
                       

> re. Note 1108.31 by PEKING::GERRYT
>    
>    And now to a controversial point...(probably discussed elsewhere?).
>    
>    It seems to me that most of the fast-lane morons are driving company
>    cars which they don't really foot the bill for whatever happens,
>    and many are subsidised in terms of the petrol consumption (indeed,
>    quite a few don't even pay for their petrol).                     

	In my opinion the so-called 'fast-lane morons' are most often the
	best drivers. I would define 'best drivers' as..

	a) those with lane discipline.
	b) those able to use indicators properly and at the correct time.
	c) those who concentrate on the road and its other users.

	A far cry from the so-called 'safe driver', proceeding at 40 mph
	in his Volvo in the centre lane, pulling out unexpectedly into
	the outside lane while sorting out his kids in the back seat !

	p1

    Re.32
    
    All the points you list are good ones.  But they seem to be the ones
    usually being broken by the 'fast lane' types.  I've never come across
    a 40mph Volvo driver, but I have been p*****d off by people risking my
    life by driving too fast up my backside, pulling out to overtake into
    the slightest gap without indicating, pulling across the front of me
    without indicating, etc.
    
    Mikef

re< Note 1108.33 by SHAPES::FIDDLERM >
    
>    usually being broken by the 'fast lane' types.  I've never come across
>    a 40mph Volvo driver, but I have been p*****d off by people risking my
                                           ^^^^^^^
    
    p****d, I believe you mean.

    I have also come across the 40mph Volvo/Allegro/Maestro driver; while
    I don't believe they are the non-indicating, instant lane-change type, 
    they do seem to be the "Oh! There's a lorry 400 yards ahead going at 
    39.8mph, so I'd better pull out now." type.
    
    Andy

    I'm also a Maestro driver....the point I was trying to make referred
    to people breaking the Law of the land so blatently.
    I don't really care if the fast lane drivers consider themselves
    far better drivers than the '40mph plodders', they are still breaking
    the law.                                  
    
    If the majority break the law....is the law an ass?...or why bother
    having laws (apart from someone having the pleasure of thinking
    they are 'getting away with it') ?
            
    Tim

    Please, please, stop saying 'fast lane' outside quotes, or without
    qualifying it with 'so-called'!  Better still, let's avoid this term
    altogether ...
    
    Jeff.

    
    What do you guys mean: 'Fast Lane'?????
    
    That's MY lane, and I wish all you GTi, GTE, SRi, GL, GT5 Turbo and
    what ever else drivers would understand that if you did actually get
    out of the way, I wouldn't hold you up at all, but you ARE holding me
    up!

    
    Anyone else spot the Porsche trapped at 155mph in the papers ?
    
    Fasted caught in a radar trap since that 150 mph German.

    
    re: the good driver v the bad driver.
    
      A good driver (imho) is a driver who can maintain maximum progress
    while abiding the highways & byways act 1977 (and amendments) and
    treating others (motorist, cyclist, pedestrian etc) with respect
    and curtesy.
    
      Those who sit in lane 3 (righthand most lane on motorways) exceeding
    the speed limit usually find their chosen lane rather busy, while
    those of us who use lanes 1 & 2 maintain a steady 69.9 mph with
    little cause to stop or continuously alter our speed.
    
      The one thing that does "get up my nose" is those that stop at
    roundabouts/junctions when an early observation shows that there
    is not another vehicle or person within 200yds.
    
      The art of good driving (inho) is the use of observation and
    decisive driving.
    
    
      Alan.

... a car in the left hand lane of the M25.  No honestly, there was, it was me.
I decided to stay there and watch what everyone else was doing, viz:

Middle and right hand lanes full of traffic travelling approx 75-80mph (it was
too crowded to go any faster!)

Despite the left hand lane being empty for a mile ahead, no-one pulled over.
Eventually, the traffic caught up with a couple of old cars, a coach and a van
doing approx 65 in the left hand lane... and all the traffic in the middle and
right hand lanes slowed down while passing them!

Why, I don't know.  Maybe they thought that any driver silly enough to use the
left hand lane may also be silly enough to try and suddenly pull out?

A bit later I was on the M1, and again only the two right hand lanes were in
use, apart from a few large, slow lorries in the left lane.  Middle lane traffic
moving at 65-ish.  A not-so-slow lorry pulled out from the left to overtake a
slower one, then tried to continue in the middle lane at 70 to overtake more
slow lorries (remember he can't legally use the right hand lane).  So along he
drove at 70, flashing the slower cars in front who wouldn't pull over.  Once
people started getting the messge, the middle lane emptied very rapidly!

Anyway, to get to the point of this note:

Somewhere else in this conference, the voicing of critical views on driving
practices has been has been derided as armchair expertise.  My journey at the
weekend was the first long motorway journey I've made since reading this
conference.  I found that participating in such discussions has given me much
greater awareness and "driving sense", and helped me to drive more sensibly,
safely and confidently.

So thanks to all who've given opinions on driving technique, and long may the
armchair expertise continue!

Scott

>         -< why do people slow down as theypass in the outside lane? >-

	So they give a "I've just overtaken you, nah, nah" look at the car 
	they've just overtaken ?

	On a more ( how could it be less ) serious note, I'll vote the Dutch 
	drivers as the best , on average, for moving over and keeping to the
	slowest available lane which suits their speed. The Germans, on
	occasions, beat even the average U.K. driver for pulling out to
	overtake slower vehicles at ridiculous distances. Travelling down
	through Germany at Christmas, there was a stretch of two lane autobahn
	with a lorry in the slowest lane, and a queue of cars in the other lane
	over three kilometres long waiting to overtake, while the inside lane
	was completely empty !

	Gordon

    
    Dutch drivers best??  Come on Gordon!
    
    
    Perhaps the Nissan has some kind of "invisibility" for the Dutch, but
    if you drive anything they perceive as valuable, they always pull out
    in front. If I get blocked on German autobahns, the registration plate
    is invariably yellow.
    
    Must admit though, I reckon the old standard of German driving is
    slipping, but they've got to go a long, long, long way down to reach
    the standards of the British ..... ;-)
    
    ( Anyone read the bit about the stealth 1.4 Astra van?)

back to the original topic...


this is a quote from "know your traffic signs" published by HMSO 1989

"...M-ways must not be used by certain classes of traffic - learner drivers
other than HGV, invalid carriages of less than 5cwt unladen weight, pedal cycles
motor cycles under 50cc capacity, agriculural vehicles & vehicles not capable
of attaining a speed of 25mph on the level when unladen & not drawing a trailer"



...art

    re .44 - yes, I read it, and its TRUE!  Astra vans are generally
    speaking the quickest vehicles on our motorways - they always seem to
    be doing just over 90mph.
    
    
    John

	Well, back to the subject, of Dutch drivers...

	Actually they do seem to have improved, on their own motorways anyway,
	in the last couple of years. I still do get the occasional driver who
	waits until I'm approaching his rear flank in a faster lane and then 
	nips out causing great wear and tear on the discs, lights and horn ! 

	This only happens on a daily basis now though, or is that a lot ? ,
	perhaps I've just got used to it !

	Gordon
	
	Re. Stealth vans in general.

	Was'nt that Russell Bulgins article in CAR last month ?

    I've been using motorways for ages, and I have this theory !
    
    Basically motorways work very well, until a certain density of traffic
    is reached. Then, because humans are driving and not robots programmed
    to obey the very letter of the law, driving styles change.
    ie
    What are motorways all about? getting from A to B at a fast steady
    speed without having to do many manouvers (=gear changes, roundabouts,
    junctions, etc etc). OK so far ?  Next question - what are the 2
    most common danger happenings caused by drivers - answer = slowwing
    down suddenly , + CHANGING LANES.
    I truely believe that people dont like doing the above, not because
    they are obstinate, but they realise (perhaps subconciensly sp?)
    thats its more dangerous than staying in one lane.
    THEREFORE as the traffic density increases - people are EVEN MORE
    likely to try to avoid slowwing down/changing lanes.
    
    Hence the driving behavior we see every day on every motorway.
    
    Rich.
    

    
    re -1, I think this is partly true, also, people think that if they
    move in a lane, then no-one will let them back out again, so having
    obtained a 'place' in the queue, they stay there.
    
    Also, when the level of traffic reaches the 'full outer lane' stage, if
    you do move in a lane, you can very often be in a position to travel
    faster than the outer lane, the legality of this has been discussed
    before, but legal/illegal aside, it is potentially dangerous, as anyone
    else moving in may not be looking out for someone coming up on their
    inside. It can be quite difficult maintaining a steady speed using the
    two inside lanes, without ending up 'untertaking' the cars which are
    constantly speeding up and then braking! 

    No, the reason traffic builds up in the outside lane is that each
    driver wants to go faster than the car in front is currently doing.
    Therefore they are all in "overtaking mode", but have run out of
    road space to achieve it.
    
    There is absolutely no problem with maintaining a steady legal speed in
    an inner lane, when you arrive at a point where the outer lane slows
    down to a lesser speed than yours.
    
    It's because the majority of drivers don't understand this, and refuse
    to pass on the inside. by maintaining their speed, that the outer lane
    build-up occurs.
    
    If more drivers had the intelligence to comprehend that the more
    parallel lanes that are in use, the greater the overall throughput,
    then we'd all be a lot better off.
    
    Jeff.

    I thought passing on the inside was a no-no, from  a few replies
    earlier?
    
    Mikef      
    

    Re: .51: So what do you do if you are travelling at say 60mph in the
    nearside lane and the outer two lanes come to a standstill?  Do you
    stop too, in case you pass the car on your right?
    
    Jeff.

    I regularly drive on the M25 in peak times; I generally stay in
    the left hand lane, excpet when overtaking, as advised in the Highway
    code.
    
    As a result of this, I am usually passing slower moving lanes of
    traffic in the centre and right hand lanes.
    
    I do not move left to "undertake" traffic, and then move right
    afterwards.
    
    Does this answer your question, Jeff?
    
    Peter.
    
    
    

    
    As I said - the legality is not the point - it's whether someone in the
    outer lane will be looking out for someone moving faster on their
    inside - and whether they will give any indication of their intention to 
    move in. If you are the driver on the inside you have to be _very_
    aware of the fact that your presence and speed may not be expected.
    The legality of what you are doing does not prevent a nasty accident!
    
    Elaine
    
    PS - if in this notes file of people who are interested in motoring
    etc, there is surprise/discussion of the legality of moving faster in
    an inside lane, what level of knowledge/expectation does Mr/Ms
    Average_driver have?                                               
                            

    Re: .53:  My question was purely rhetorical!
    
    Re: .54:  If I change lanes to the left, I check first that it's safe
    to do so.  If I am moving faster than a lane on my right (which will
    only happen if the motorway is solid and no-one is moving at more than
    about 60mph or less) then I would expect others to check also. 
    However, since collision avoidance is everyone's responsibility, I
    would also anticipate the unexpected.
    
    Jeff.

    
    re .51 et al
    
       The road traffic act 0f 1977 clearly prohibited passing a moving
    vehicle that is to the right hand side of the vehicle that you are
    travelling in.
       Due to traffic congestion on the motorways of Britain an amendment
    to this act was obtained in 1989.
       The amendment (roughly)
    
       It is only permitted to pass a vehicle that is to your right
    hand side when:
      i) the traffic to your right is in a queue formation or turning
         right
     ii) the traffic to your right is travelling slower than
         is possible for the lane that you are currently in.
    iii) it is safe to complete the manouver without
         obstructing the safe passage of another vehicle.
    
     NB. under no circumstance will manouvering to a faster moving lane
         to the left, for the sole purpose of passing the slower vehicles
         be permitted, unless advised to do so by a member of the emergency
         services.
    
    This is how I remember it. It is worded a little more technically,
    but that about sums up the rules.
                                                                      
         Alan.
    

	This was in the highway code when I took my test in 1974.

	Does this mean all that time I've been conforming to the highway code
	I was actually breaking the law?

	Heather    

    re .8
    
    Patrick,
    
    	the states are educated to their system. In Europe (exclude UK)
    NOBODY looks at the right-hand mirror before moving right off the
    middle lane. It is bad enough when the silly buggers move left without
    looking.
    
    Agree though that the "full lefthand lane empty righthand lane" is a
    pain.
    
    	regards  George Frost. 

    I noticed in yesterdays paper that the Govt/Police are considering
    further changes to speed limits.
    
    The atricle stated that 'variable' speed limits may be used,
    so that a 10mph lower limit could be specified on motorways.
    
    This would be achieved using speed limit indicators which are
    controlled by Police and/or light-sensitive detectors.
    
    Reason quoted for this being that far more accidents occur at night.
    
    It also mentioned that if a proposed EC-wide speed limit of 81mph
    was introduced, then the UK could still keep to 70/60 mph...
    
    J.R.

    Re: .60: and ...
    

    
    This seems as good a place as any....
    
    Does anyone know if the temporary speed limits on motorways (as shown
    by flashing amber lights, NOT by big '50' signs) are legal limits, or
    advisory? I always back off a bit when passing them (but probably not
    enough 8^).
    
    I've noticed that most folk just seem to plough on regardless.
    
    I'd guess that even if they're 'only' advisory you could be done for
    'without due care and attention', or whatever they're calling it this
    week, but I'm curious to know if it's a speeding offence.
    
    BTW, the Highway Code doesn't make it clear (to me at least!).
    
    Cheers
    
    Nigel
    

As I understand it, it isn't a speeding offence per se BUT the nice policeman
could misinterpret your actions and book you for dangerous driving (or whatever
the various equivalents are)

	A policeman friend of mine said that temporary speed limits displayed are
mandatory and you will still be prosecuted for exceeding them, 

but....

	Whilst you will be fined you cannot have your licence endorsed with any 
points unless you were exceeding the original speed limit of that road. In 
addition, you may be considered for driving witout due care or wreckless driving
depending up on the circumstances.

    
    I'm sorry, I tried, but I just can't resist......
    
    > wreckless driving
    
    The only sort to have IMHO!  8^) 8^) 8^)
    
    Nigel

As I originally understood the legal position, The 50 limit was only to be
imposed on road works involving a contraflow.

Now, every little bit of road works, even if it is only the Hard Shoulder that
is cone'd off, seems to sprout 50 limit signs.  I suspect that they are NOT legal.
Anyone have any concrete evidence to support this?  Let's stick to facts here,
no opinions please.

				Malcolm.

	Malcolm

	ring this number and check if you like.


	0734 536000

	Andy

    As far as I am aware to reduce the speed limit on a specified road the
    Department of Transport or whoever must go to court or some other such
    place and list the reasons for the change. This then has to be approved
    by some Judge like character. Therefore any flashing 50 mph signs
    cannot be mandatory speed limits, they are just advisory or temporary.
    
    Andy

    The only mandatory 50 MPH speed limit reductions are the ones with
    display the 50 mph speed limit inside the usual red circle speed limit
    indicator. Signs such as the overhead ones, or the rectangular "Maximum
    Speed 50Mph" signs are advisory, but if you are going too fast for the
    conditions, this can be construed as reckless driving by the nice man
    with the blue light. 
    
    Sean.

    There was a proposal (white paper?) to make the overhead "advisory"
    limits mandatory, but I'm pretty sure it hasn't gone any further yet.
    There was also a proposal to make "undertaking" (passing on the left on
    motorways) legal under more circumstances than it is today, but that
    was definitely rejected just recently.

    
    
    Speaking of motorways,I must have drifted into a convoy of people
    on the way to the annual crap driver convention this morning.
    
    It makes you want to SCREAM!!!!!!!!!!
    
    
    Andy.

>    on the way to the annual crap driver convention this morning.
    
annual?  I thought they were daily...

Chris.

According to BBC's Watchdog 93% of us think we are better than average drivers,
so I suppose you would expect to see comments like .71 and .72 ;-)

Dave.

    
    RE-1
    
    93% of us think we are better than average drivers.
    
    Better than average! my foot.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    I'm better than great!  ;-)
    
    
    Andy.

>According to BBC's Watchdog 93% of us think we are better than average drivers,
>so I suppose you would expect to see comments like .71 and .72 ;-)

Looks like I'm in the minority then, as I've said before there's plenty of
room for improvement when it comes to my own driving techniques!  I still
feel that I have the right to complain when some other driver threatens
my life through general indifference to other road users.

I think people who consider themselves to be `better than average' usually
turn out to be the worst drivers.  Even if it was true, an attitude where
better driving skills are for other people shows a certain degree of
complacency which is at best arrogant, at worst will lead to accidents.

Oh dear, I am in a holier-than-thou mood this morning...

Chris.

(oops, there goes another rat-hole)

    Let's face there are 2 things in life people will never admit to being
    not good at.
    
    1. driving
    
    2. sex
    
    enough said!!
    

    re.76
    
    It's enjoying yourself at both that matters, not being good at it :^)
    
    A.

This morning I had my "annoyed at bad drivers" hat on when someone pulled out
in front of me without looking (He/She can't have looked!), and I had a good
beep at them.

Then, at the next roundabout, I pulled out onto a roundabout (I was waiting,
so I *must* have looked), and just as a I was passing the first exit, I heard
a beep as a Ford Escort nearly knocked the back of my car! Regardless of how
fast he was driving, I guess I should have seen him.

So I guess, I went from good driver to smug driver to bad driver!

Mark.

>>>	Malcolm

>>>	ring this number and check if you like.


>>>	0734 536000

>>>	Andy


	And who would I be ringing in Reading, you're surely not suggesting
the Police?

	I would have thought the Ministry of Transport, but one could spend
hours on the 'phone trying to find someone there who knew what they were talking
about!

	When the 50 limit was signed on the A329(M) last year (whilst replacing
the central reservation Barriers), I did think of ringing the County Council and
asking "by what authority was the limit imposed?"  But I didn't get around to it.

				Malcolm.

    
    This has been discussed before in here somewhere (this topic that
    is!)...
    
    The 'hazard' illuminated speed limits are compulsory and have been for
    a while now.
    
    The temporary speed limits were also supposed to have been made
    compulsory at the same time, but the law makers screwed up and it
    didn't happen. If this mistake hasn't already been corrected it will be.
    
    
    Setting or changing speed limits on roads requires planning permission. 
    
    Richard.
    

    
    Someone said in here a few notes back that the only thing that matters
    in sex or driving is that you enjoy yourself.  I think not.
    
    Either one will kill you if not done in a safe manner......... ;^)
    
    Brian
    

    Some people seem to think that sex and driving are good for you if done
    at the same time.  However I don't live in Albert Square so can't
    comment.
    
    Regards
    
    Bruce :*)