Conference terri::cars_uk

	I agree totally about the indicating too early.

	It seems to be a lot of people either indicate too early,
	 or, not indicating,  they follow the curve around
	 the outside, looking as if to take the first exit, and
	 then keep going round.

	I just nudge out, in a hinting sort of way ( :-) )
	 seems to get them worried, but I doubt if it will
	 improve their habits.

    I tend to drive my car with the same philosophy with which I ride my
    bicycle. That is; I ride and drive in a way which I think is sensible
    and is going to keep me alive. This may involve throwing the Highway
    Code out the window.
    
    Regarding roundabouts. I throw the Highway Code away, and drive in a
    way which seems most appropriate for the particular roundabout. This
    depends on the roundabout, and the way other people are driving on it.
    This is particularly true with a place like Basingstoke where there
    aren't any roundabouts, but a lot of big circular one-way systems with
    indeterminate speed limits.
    
    I dunno about the roundabout you mention, but I'd drive prepared for
    what people might do; not what they should do. This is particular true
    when riding a bicycle. 
    
    Dougie
    
    
    

I've noticed more and more lately that people going straight on 
indicate right as they approach the roundabout and then indicate left
as they pass the first exit. What's wrong with these people? Do they
LIKE causing accidents?


Ian

    
    Re .3
    
    Why does that cause an accident? I'd rather that, than not bother 
    signalling at all!
    
    Mark

    Re .3
    
    But surely by doing that they're indicating their exact movements
    in the sequence they're making them? How does that cause accidents?
    
    JJ.

The Highway code tells you how to go round a standard roundabout, where to 
signal and what lane to be in. If everybody did this negotiating them would
be far simpler and the traffic would flow more freely. However many people 
either don't know how to go round them or are too ignorant to bother. It is 
these pi**ocks that cause the accidents. The problem seems to be that 
75 percent of people do not negotiate them correctly....maybe more driver 
training is required......

								G.P

    
    Anyone care to mention (without recourse to the Highway Code) what
    the rules are?
    
    Mark

    
    No rules, but basically:
    
    Turning left: Approach in left hand lane, signalling left.
    
    Straight on: Approach in the appropriate lane (highway code prefers
    		 the left lane when given a choice of two), signalling
    		 left having passed the exit prior to the one you intend
    		 to leave by.
    
    Turning right: Approach in right hand lane, signalling right. Start
    	 	 a left hand signal having passed the exit prior to the
    		 one you intend to leave by.
            
    William.

    From memory only...
    
    When turning first left :
    
    		Indicate left on the approach to the island (remembering
    		M-S-M !), and remain in the left hand lane.
    
    When turning after 2 left through to going straight on :
    
    		Don't indicate on approach to the island, take the left had
    		or centre lane (not both), then indicate afted passing the
    		centre of the road previous to the one you require.
    
    When turning right :
    
    		Indicate right on approach to the island, taking the centre
    		or right hand lane (depending on which exit you want), and
    		then, as before, indicate as you passing the centre of the
    		road previous to the one you require.
    
    Having said all that,  all of this will only work if ALL driver do the
    same, otherwise, is that car not indicating because it is going
    straight on, or is hav'nt they decided yet ?
    
    
    Shaun.

    
    Fine, you seem to agree :^)
    
    The problem is, though, what constitutes left, straight on and right 
    on a roundabout with more than four exits, and do the same rules apply
    on a very big roundabout (like those in Basingstoke)?
    
    Mark

    
    I think the rules change - depending upon the type of roundabout - ie
    one of those slippy white bumps in the road - or a 'proper' roundabout.
    for a mini roundabout - don't indicate if you are going straight on, on
    a large roundabout - be in the correct lane for straight on (depends on
    roadmarkings/roundabout) and start to signal left as soon as you are
    passed the previous exit. This was what I was taught last year when I
    took my motorbike test. The problem with many of the large roundabouts
    is that they are so large, it is often necessary to use your indicators
    in a 'non-standard' way, just as a matter of common sense!
    
    (PS for turning right - signal right until the exit before you want,
    then swap to left indicators)
    
    Another roundabout 'pet-hate' is people not following the curve of the 
    roundabout when going straight on, and therefor trying to push anyone
    on the inside onto the roundabout...
    
    Oh, and another one, :-)  people in hot hatches determined to
    demonstrate their 0-60 times, which gives people waiting to pull out
    onto roundabouts in old Landys, no chance at all to pull out....
    
     

    The rules are fair enough. However, I think there are so many wierd and
    wonderful artisticly designed roundabouts nowadays, that the driver
    should act appropriately for the roundabout.
    
    If the roundabout is one of those large interestingly shaped ones which
    are common in Basinsgtoke, I would probably indicate as I saw fit. My
    main concern is that other motorists know exactly what I'm doing, and
    what I'm about to do next. This might involve indicating right on
    entering the roundabout, if the second exit 'straight on' is a long way
    round.
    
    Also, I'm not sure how useful the highway code is for roundabouts with
    2 lanes, when the approach road has four. Or if the roundabout has
    traffic lights. or some indeterminate number of lanes, produced by a
    random number generator, rather than advance planning.
    
    My rule; no rules. Common Sense.

Well I've got no problem with people indicating right to go straight on at one 
particular roundabout I negotiate every day...

There is no right turn at this roundabout.

It's a dual carriageway in, two lanes on the roundabout and two lanes going to
one on the exit. 


....now legally the only time you are allowed to pass someone on the left is 
when they are indicating right...


hehehehehe...I can usually get past 10's of cars here... :-)


I'm just careful of people cutting to the left whilst I'm on the 
roundabout...works for me...

    The way to tell what exit is what is to look at the sign with the
    picture of the roundabout on it before you get to it.
    
    Imagine a clock face superimposed over the picture...
    
    	From where you are (6) to 9 (inclusive) is a left turn;
    	From after 9 to 12 (inclusive) is straight ahead;
    	After 12 is a right turn.
    
    Use this simple guide where there are no other road markings etc and it
    will tell you how to indicate and which lane to be in.
    
    Rob
    

    
    Umm sounds reasonable, but what if all the exits are after 12?
    
    Mark

    Then there all right turns!  

re .13


>>>....now legally the only time you are allowed to pass someone on the left is 
>>>when they are indicating right...

 	From memory the Higway code states that you can pass on the left when,

	1. on a one-way street
	2. when a vehicle is waiting to turn right
	3. when the trafic is moving ("slowly") in queues, in lanes
	4. when you want to turn left at a junction

	Now I think all these can apply to roundabouts in different
	circumstances.

	If everyone followed the Highway code we'd all be a lot safer.

	Graham

    
    Exactly, so how does that differ from signalling right and then left
    for a straight ahead?
    
    See, the Highway Code (and driving 'advice' in general) isn't a Bible,
    it can only be guidance, to be intepreted as best you can while
    driving. (E.g. HOW close do you have to be for it to be unsafe to stop
    on an amber light?).
    
    Mark

    If you are going straight on there is no need to indicate right.
    

    
    I know! BUT, the original comment was that it was dangerous, but it
    seemed less dangerous to me than not signalling at all!
    
    I tend to view everyone with complete suspicion on a roundabout! :^)
    
    Mark

    OK Heres an interesting on:
    
    I am approaching a very large roundabout which consists of 4 lanes.
    I want to take the last exit. (at 3 O'clock or more)
    So I approach in  the rightmost lane indicating right.
    When I reach 12 O'clock I suddenly decide that its not a good idea to
    be in the inside lane anymore cause I can't cut accross to my turning
    when I need to.
    So I indicate left, not to exit the roundabout on whatever exit I am
    passing but simply to change lanes.
    
    Would anyone stone me for doing this if they were coming onto the
    roundabout from the exit I am passing whilst changing lane!!!
    
    Arf.
    
    PS I realise that some drivers are crazy enough to move from the
    innermost lane of the roundabout to the exit in one move!!

    Changing lanes whilst going past a roundabout entrance can be a bit
    dangerous - try to get the moving over and done with whilst between
    exits - much safer.
    
    Rib

	A lot of people's lane discipline is terrible; but often, its
	made worse by bad design that causes much lane swapping.  There
	are many large roundabouts with traffic lights on them that can
	get *very* confusing.

	Once you are on a roundabout no matter how many lanes it
	has, the left-most n lanes feed into the next exit.  So, if the 
	next exit has one lane, the left-most lane is the one that
	you should be in.  If the next exit has 2 lanes, the left two lanes
	are the ones that you want - making sure that you don't swap lanes
	as you exit and cut someone up.  Add to that a rule that you
	should never be to the left of someone who can legally exit
	at the next exit when you do not, then you can work out where you
	need to be.

	Dave

Roundabouts, especially big ones, and even more so the ones with those stupid
traffic lights halfway round, are always tricky in traffic!

One of the problems is that half the drivers attempt to follow the Highway Code
to the letter, position themselves in the "correct" lane, make the "correct"
signals, and take the "correct" line through the roundabout. Unfortunately they
don't take into account other conditions - broken down cars, blocked exits,
other drivers who accidentally got in the wrong lane. Thus they just steam-
roller their way through, and usually end up cutting somebody up, who then
stops, which then causes more conjestion.

The other half are the dim-wits, the ones who have difficulty working out which
pedal does what. They approach in whatever lane is clearest, despite the fact
that they are doing 5mph. They attempt to take the roundabout in "straight
lines", cutting across other traffic without looking, indicating or even
thinking which way they want to go. They don't cause accidents as such because
normally people try to keep out of their way (unless two dim-wits are on the
same roundabout at the same time), but all the unnecessary braking they cause
irritates drivers, again causes conjestion which often causes accidents further
back in the queue to the roundabout.

The remaining half of the drivers have excellent car control, good taste,
impeccable manners, subtle modesty and can't add up  ; -)

mb

    My favourite roundabout is just up from Heriot-Watt University in
    Currie, Scotland.
    
    It is designed to look easy to go straight on, but the curve of the
    roundabout is more acute than it looks. To add to that, a bogie-man
    comes along in the middle of the night and sprinkles loose gravel on
    the ground. This means that it is quite easy to be steering in a
    straight-on sort of fashion, but the vehicle (officer), obeys a sort of
    more Newtonian law and slips elegantly to the 11 O'clock position.
    
    Here comes the clever bit. Instead of bumping into the kerb, they've
    built a Red Pillar Box there. So one ricochets of the pillar box,
    somewhat disturbing the passenger who is trying to get his seat-belt
    on at the time, and ends up in a nice ladies garden in the one-o'clock
    position who fancied a new fence anyway. And this is her usual way of
    getting one. 
    
    In the Pillar Box V Vauxhall Viva contest, the Viva was a write-off.
    The Pillar Box was unscathed, save a bit of flaked paint. That was yer
    ol' pillar box though. They don't build 'em like that anymore. Pillar
    Boxes on roundabouts should have crumple zones I reckon.
    
    Dougie
    
    PS - Don't suppose anyone knows this roundabout? Should we have a
    roundabout hall of fame? Basinsgtoke is the probable winner.

    I reckon the worst roundabout is the infamous Twin Bridges one in
    Bracknell at the end of the A329. It was pretty bad anyway and they
    have now put lights on the bloody thing. When the lights go down,
    (which as they are Ferranti computer controlled is quite often) things
    run more smoothly. Good example of stupid road planners. Having said
    that, the first roundabout away from the Twin Bidges one going down
    the A329 has finally had the amount of lanes cut down from three to
    two. About time too.
    
    Incidently, this morning, at an unfamiliar roundabout, I ended up in
    the right hand lane when I wanted to turn left. This was due to a
    queue of lorries obscuring the signs. The usual course of action here
    for wallies would be to screech away from the line and carve up the 
    traffic to my left, but I went all the way round instead. What a good 
    boy I am. :-)
    
    
    Jerome.                

    What gets me is the number of people who dont even attempt to go around
    a roundabout but simple drive stright over, going from the inside lane
    to the outer and back again, without even looking in their mirrors to
    see the poor guy they just put on to the roundabout. Also the number of
    people the cut the corner off when they see the exit they want going
    from middle lane to outer and then all the way back to the inner lane.
    Its not good for my nervous system or the front of my car.
    
    Neil

    
    On one of the biggest roudabouts in Basingstoke, (Town Center West), I
    once witnessed some pillock who had taken the wrong turning off the
    roundabout, then decided to reverse back onto the roudabout, so they
    could carry on round, and take the correct turning!
    
    All he had to do was to carry on about 800 yards, turn around at the
    next roundabout, and come back, but instead he decided to endanger the
    lives of other drivers!
    
    B*****d!
    
    Steve.
    

    Re: Worst roundabouts/Roundabout-hall-of-fame
    
    The Magic Roundabouts in Swindon take some beating in my book. I pity
    the people who have to take their test there.
    
    Andy

Well in addition to the rules about lane discipline I follow a couple of 
others.

Never overtake or drive side by side other vehicles on the roundabout
(particularly if they are lorries) as you only get upset when they don't
follow the line you think they should,
and
once onto the roundabout slow down to a reasonable speed in case 
other slow moving vehicles are so fed up trying to get on that they are
just about to shut their eyes and hope for the best.  :-)

There, that covers the Landys getting on and the 'being pushed onto the 
middle of the roundabout' moans. :-)

TP   of Basingstoke

    If a Landy pulled out in front of me, I'm pretty sure I'd be able to
    avoid it - even if I was going 90mph. In a collision between a Landy
    and a Fiesty, I've no doubt whatsoever who would come out worst.
    
    Dougie
    

    
    Re .31
    
    Ah, but if it was a Golf instead of a Fiesta you'd barge the Landrover
    off the road and continue unpeturbed! :^) <---- Honest!
    
    Mark

Hurrah, I'd nearly stopped watching CARS_UK!!

Sometimes being run off the road in a small car / landy shunt happens.

I was driving the Landy, I got shunted off the road  :-(((


But her insurance pays :-)))

    Why should people obey the highwaycode at roundabouts?
    They dont obey it any where else on the roads -)
    
    I navigate quite a few roundabouts each day, nearly all are a case
    of try to drive as safe as you can, indicating, and avoiding cars
    (builders vans being the worst, followed by red sierras and blue 
    cavaliers) doing the right turn from the left lane onto the roundabout.

    One of the trickiest roundabouts, in my view ("Magic Roundabout at
    Swindon - and Hemel Hempstead - excepted) is the one at Jct 11 on M4 at
    Reading. 
    
    	I was leaving DECpark one evening, a few months ago, and was
    queueing on the inside lane up to the roundabout. I wanted to turn
    right onto M4 West but my logic was that the two lanes leading onto the
    roundabout turn into three on the roundabout proper so I intended to
    move from my inside lane position to the middle lane of the roundabout
    which then allows you to trundle round the outside of other folks also
    heading West and take the inside lane on the sliproad. Got all that?!
    
    	The problem was another gentleman, Deccie with IAM badge, who was
    alongside me in the queue up to the roundabout but also decided to use
    the middle lane on the roundabout as he wanted to go straight on. He
    mouthed me off for using his road space and I wasn't too impressed with
    his advanced driving.
    
    	Having an open mind on such things and wishing to learn from my
    "mistake", who was in the wrong?
    
    Colin

    Tony,
    	I've been in the car with you. The only reason you do so well is
    that you're usually looking at some girlie's bo^^y or dreaming of BT
    @@.
    	Another reason could be the fact you thought you were on the wrong
    side cutting up inercent folks when really you were on the right side
    getting out of the way. ;-)
    
    		Chris

    
    Colin,
    
    I'd say you were both in the wrong, hand in your badges immediately.
    No place for your sort in the IAM. Try RoSPA.
    
    Seriously, taking the left hand lane to turn right is a bit cheeky,
    but I understand why you do it at that particular roundabout.
    (Though being the unprogressive bore that I am, I tend to the right
    hand lane). I think the only problem was that neither of you wanted
    to 'give way' or blend with the traffic - after all, you'ld have had
    exactly the same problem if you had both wanted to go straight on...
    
    Go on, tell me now that the other car was mine...
                                                           
    William. 

	Try RoSPA?  But, William, you know that RoSPA have higher standards
	(and re-tested standards) than IAM!

	Colin, was the car a silver old-style MR2 with the stereo turned
	up?

	Dave (fit and merge) Rusling

    Colin,
    
    My guess is the person in the wrong is the one who lost his temper...
    
    Otherwise .8 & .14 apply as guidelines ( if we all use the same set of
    guidelines }^| ) i.e. Its a right-turn.
    
    
     	Tony.

    
    re last couple....
    
    try the highway code....latest edition.. not sure of the page number
    but it is the section on roundabouts.
       There it will tell you that when a dual carriageway meets a
    roundabout the right hand lane should only be used if you intend to
    re-enter the road that you left to join the roundabout. ie: 340 degrees
    around the roundabout.......
    
    
    
    Alan

    It's always around 6'oclock when I drive home. Does that mean all
    roundabouts are right-turns? :-<>

    re -2: 340 degrees......if you exit a roundabout 360 degrees from the
    point that you joined it, you will probably have a head on
    collision..:-)
    
      Alan.

    The people who think that using the right hand lane to enter a
    roundabout when going straight ahead or the left hand lane when turning
    right should refer to page 29 of the Highway Code.
    
    Several years ago the BBC ran a series on improving driving skills.One
    of these programs covered roundabouts.A police driving intructor said
    that the main problem on roudabouts is the incorrect use of lanes.
    If turning left or going straight ahead use the left hand lane.If
    you are on a dual carriageway and you are going straight ahead you
    should enter the roundabout in the lane you wish to exit it by.If
    turning right use the right hand lane.
    
      John
     

    
    Nah, enter the roundabout from the left hand lane proceed to the most
    central of the lanes. When at the apex of the roundabout pile on the
    power and exit into the left hand lane of the road of your choice. 
    
    Notes: if in the above process you happen to offend any other
    driver, extend the longest finger of the right hand and protrude the hand
    through the open right hand window and accelerate as hard as possible
    whilst turning up the volume of the sterio.
    
    That is the way that it is done, no matter what the Highway code says
    all the Lemins in the little motorised boxes will follow the driver in
    front. and if the driver in front is not class 1 police driver all hell
    will break loose. 
    
    
    Alan

How do they cause accidents?

I thought this would be obvious. The car in front signals to turn right 
(let's assume a 4 exit/entrance roundabout for argument's sake), and
gets in the right hand lane. You move over to the left to go straight on
when, half way round the roundabout, the car in front decides
to take the next exit and indicates left, pulling in front of you.


As to what are the rules governing what is straight on etc. Surely straight
on means to continue on the road you are travelling on, be it the A4122
or High Street or whatever. This is usually obvious frm the road layout.
Anything to the left of this exit, I would condsider to be a left turn off and
likewise on the other side.


ian

    
    The accident isn't caused by the signalling, but their manouvere
    without checking you were there, or by you being too close :^).
    The point is that the signal DIDN'T cause the accident. Since you
    can choose either left or right lane (according to the HC) to go
    straight on, such an accident could happen anyway. The only reason
    a signal could be blamed for the accident you describe is if the 
    driver of left hand car didn't make any allowance for the other driver
    being an idiot, simply because they were signalling! On roundabouts the 
    rule 'Stupid until proven otherwise' always seems wise to follow.
    
    Obviously (since there are a number of alternatives here) what is
    defined as 'straight on' varies a great deal from one mind to the
    next. 
    
    Mark

    Reminds me of one the other day: M4 J13 (Newbury) coming up from
    Newbury, round roundabout and back down to turn off about half a mile
    down the A34. 
    
    Anyway, I'm in the RH lane signalling right reaching the top curve
    meeting the A34 southbound. A car coming southbound pulls out in the LH
    lane, signalling nothing, fine, they're going straight ahead, past the
    M4 east join slip, and off on the A34 heading towards newbury. I'm
    going that way, in the RH lane (it's dual carriage ahead) and start
    signalling left, keeping a little behind this other car. 
    
    Bearing in mind this roundabout could take 3 to 4 cars wide at a pinch,
    and that this other car was scraping the LH kerb, when it reached the
    A34 South exit it merrilly skirts across the exit (kerb to kerb) to
    head off right onto the M4 west. 
    
    Fortunately I had sensed something was positioned well to be able to
    brake, but not join the A34 and had to do another revolution.
    
    Richard

    	The trouble with the Highway code, and other such publications
    giving advice on this matter, is that it only takes into account of a
    "normal, cross-roads-type" roundabout, ie four exits, two lanes in and
    out, etc.
    
    	As has been pointed out here several times, it then all boils down
    to ones interpretation of the current layout and who has priority over
    what, when, and where.
    
    	I'm amazed there are not a hell of a lot more accidents on
    roundabouts considering the volumes of traffic, the speeds and the
    idiotic things some people do. I'm also amazed that councils and/or
    police don't do obvious things to try and improve the situation
    slightly. The great thing about the magic roundabouts is the *low*
    speed through them which not only reduces the possibility of an
    accident but also allows a much higher throughput of cars.
    
    	Many incidents on roundabouts are, in my opinion, due to the high
    speeds of some of the cars - 50-60 mph is not uncommon. Those wishing
    to pull on have a hard job sometimes and aggression is the norm - some
    folks even speed up to try and prevent anyone else entering "in front"
    of them. Some means of slowing cars down and allowing time to get into
    the correct lane should be introduced. 
    
    	The other thing that it strikes me could be done is to allow inside
    lane "trickers". For example, M4 East-bound exiting at Jct 11 and wishing 
    to turn left towards Reading have ONE lane dedicated to them and leading
    straight onto the inside lane of the Basingstoke Road - traffic heading
    towards Reading from M4 West or Basingstoke would be led into the
    inside lane of the roundabout exiting onto the Basingstoke Road in the
    outside lane. Only two lanes allowed on the roundabout.
    
    	Oh, and by the way, it was NOT Mr Betts to whom I was referring
    earlier - I'd keep well away from his mean machine even if I could keep
    up with it!!! I do that manouvre sometimes when the outside lane is
    overcrowded with respect to the inside. It seems fairly logical to me
    that inside approach be able to use both inside and middle lanes on the
    roundabout and middle lane of the roundabout is marked for either
    straight on or right so I see nothing "wrong" in what I did - you are
    right, though, about keeping calm (which I was) and watching other
    traffic closely. I think the other guy was more in the wrong than I
    was...nur, nur!!
    
    Colin

    You lot don't know you're born. Come and spend a week in Brussels, then
    you'd have something to whine about.
    
    Laurie.

    Very true, and even worse if you drive!

    Not anything to do with roundabouts but it does bring a new dimension to
    positioning at junctions in general.
    
    I was at one of the sets of lights on Basingstoke Rd in Reading this morning
    (not a cross roads, but the sort with only one road filtering in from the 
    right) waiting to go straight on, and the guy behind me obviously got fed 
    up waiting so he mounted the pavement, drove around me and across the 
    junction before rejoining the road about 50 yards further down. 
    
    Cheers,
    
    Spike.

    Just read my last note where I mentioned "indicating". 
    
    I hate it when people just move across you without indicating, but have
    you noticed how people put there foot down when you do indicate?  

    Pet hate - drivers intending to go straight on who approach too fast
    and rely on their speed to carry them through regardless. (e.g Moat
    House rdbt outside DECpark when it's not fully snarled up).
    
    On the correct approach lane question, I was told on my IAM test to
    ignore the Highway Code advice on "right hand lane approach for right
    hand exit". 
    
    (Leaving the M4 westbound at jct 11 I dutifully joined a queue in the
    right hand lane of the motorway slip road to head up the A33 to Reading
    - wrong according to my examiner - better to get in the less busy left
    lane and filter in to the correct lane when in the rdbt).
    
    John 

    
    re-1
    both lefthand lanes on that roundabout (assuming your travelling
    eastward) are designated 'to Reading', try going right from a lefthand
    lane when I'm on the inside lane and you'll be driving a hire car :-)...
    
    Alan..
    

    When I was working in Decpark about once a month there would be cops
    stationed on the island separating the two sides of the south-bound A33
    on that roundabout. They were obviously looking to do prats in the left
    lane trying to go right (as well as the more obvious red-gamblers).
    Once I even saw somebody in the left lane with his right indicator
    winking cancel it and go left after a long hard stare from the cop on
    the island!
    
    Brian

    
    re.59.
    
    IMHO. a driver who chooses a left hand lane to turn right or a right hand
    lane to turn left should have their license revoked. If it has not
    previously come to your attention, manouvers such as these *probably*
    contribute to the many deaths of motorcyclists, Yes your actions are
    dangerous, and I take great exception to the thought that oneday I will
    be another statistic, just because *you* couldn't be bothered to use
    lane disciplin or highway etiquet.
    
      Alan
    ps the reason my insurance is ALMOST 1000 pounds is that I have on tap
       a better performace (with exception to stopping) than the 928
       Porsche. :-)
    
    note *probably* = depending on who's figures you look at , gover-mental
    or motorcyclist action groups.
         *you* does not specifically single out you, because YOU probably
    have the best lane discipline and road etiquet known to man (sorry
    Ladies, that word is only a figment of speach).
     

>    What is the legal status of road markings anyway ? They seem to be
>    widely disregarded.

Where they require you to do something they have the same status as any
other traffic sign.  Some markings are only advisory.  I don't know the
status of lane arrows painted on the road.

jb

    re .61 Wow, I'm a bike rider killer!
    
    Never mind the bike rider last night that shot out from between the two
    queues waiting to join the roudabout from decpark direction. He shot
    out between two cars proceeding round the roundabout correctly, causing
    the rear one to brake severely.
    
    Or the rider this morning on the M4 cruising down the white line
    BETWEEN the middle and outer lanes, passing between pairs of cars
    within inches at 70+ MPH!!
    
    Now then, I NEVER said I would perform that act and take GREAT
    exception to being singled out as:
    >>	oneday I will be another statistic, just because *you* couldn't 
    >>	be bothered to use lane disciplin or highway etiquet.
    
    I did however explain the way the lanes were marked, and if so how the
    manouvre could be completed safely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    Your more likely to be a statistic of your OWN selfish lane discipline
    or highway etiquet.
    
    Richard

    
    This is another subject which rears its ugly head on a regular basis.
    
    There are a lot of motorcyclists around these days with the idea that 
    they are subject to a completely different set of rules about lane
    usage, use of indicators, etc. The days of automatically trusting a 
    rider of a large motorcycle are long gone. Too many of them nowadays
    are speed junkies who think nothing of performing the mind numbing
    stunts described throughout this conference.
    
    When I say a lot, I mean a large proportion, and not all. I wouldn't
    carry out some of the manouveres I see carried out by cars, but I
    see 'em happen. The knee-jerk support of ALL motorcyclists by fellow
    riders is crazy. Is it any wonder some people tar you all with the 
    same brush, when you consider all car drivers to be idiots and all
    bikers to be saints?
    
    Mark

    (Mr Not Very Mellow here)
    
    Strangely enough, motor bikes Never, ever bother me. I think there is a
    sort of accelerated Natural Selection process amongst bikers (both
    pedal and put put), which means you either learn how to ride and
    survive, or cop yer whack.
    
    If a Biker wants to zoom up between lanes, that's fair enough. What's
    the problem?
    
    Dougie
    

    I think the main thing with bikers is that you don't tend to notice
    (and remember) the ones that are fairly sane - there ARE a lot of mad
    buggers on two wheels - but there are a lot more that aren't.
    
    *Stereotyping on*
    The worst two categories are couriers in London and
    Sunday-only-matching-leathers etc types who go completely mad once a
    week.
    *Stereotyping off*
    
    Ho-hum,
    Rob

    
    ooohhhh
     I let myself in for that didn't I.....:-)
    
    Those mad buggers (as you put it) don't need to be remembered. The
    problem with many (not all) car drivers is that they believe all road
    users vehicles have the same poor acceleration as their own. The
    motorcyclist previously mentioned probably had the ability to
    accelerate through the gaps in less time than the drivers would take to
    change lanes. To a motorcyclist it is quite apparent when a driver
    intends to change lane, manouvering nearer to white line checking
    mirrors et al, as the vehicle approaches the white lines, with hard
    acceleration a bike can get past the vehicle long before it's shut the
    door.
    
      Alan
    
    ps. I do drive (well traffic jam) a Cavalier 2.0cdi as well......
    

>>                     <<< Note 1608.68 by UBOHUB::BELL_A1 >>>
>>     I let myself in for that didn't I.....:-)
    
    YES!
>>    The motorcyclist previously mentioned probably had the ability to
>>    accelerate through the gaps in less time than the drivers would take to
>>    change lanes. To a motorcyclist it is quite apparent when a driver
>>    intends to change lane, manouvering nearer to white line checking
>>    mirrors et al, as the vehicle approaches the white lines, with hard
>>    acceleration a bike can get past the vehicle long before it's shut the
>>    door.
    
    The one on the motorway: No gaps, this is between the doors of
    parrallel cars travelling in the middle and outer lanes at 70+MPH! (one
    of the sets of doors was mine!)
    
    THe one at the junction: Acceleration from rest over 10 feet does not
    make your bike fast enough and small enough to fit into a car's gap
    between two cars travelling at 30+MPH
    
    Sorry, in both cases I think they were plonkers, and lucky to survive.
    But if they hadn't what's the bet they'd blame the car drivers!
    
    However, I will accept that you are probably sane, and given the choice
    would avoid physical conflict with metal.
    
    Richard

    
    re: ::RDAVIES....
    
      I have never had an accident where I felt that I had to blame a car
    driver, and many of my 'motorcycling' friends feel the same, (although a
    car drivers misjudgment may have helped). Accidents are caused by
    temporary lapses of consentration, nothing else. If you are 100% alert
    you should be able to recognise potential danger and take action
    accordinly (if it don't happen then ok, if it does happen then your
    ready).
    
    As for the 'in touch with metal'.... The consequences of my last lapse
    in concentration are: 12 inches of surgical steel and 12,1 inch screws,
    I have no choice, I can't get away from it...
    
    Alan.
    

re.  Accidents are caused by temporary lapses of consentration, nothing else.

Not even a blowout at 70 on the Motorway, or a mixture of diesel, water and mud
on a sharp bend (my case), or the rare event of brake failure. All these and
more can cause accidents.

Simon

>>re.  Accidents are caused by temporary lapses of consentration, nothing else.
>>
>>a mixture of diesel, water and mud  on a sharp bend (my case), 
    
    If you have an accident because of this (admittedly very bad) mix
    on the road, it can still be described as a lack of concentration...
    
    
>>Not even a blowout at 70 on the Motorway, or a mixture of diesel, water and mud
>>on a sharp bend (my case), or the rare event of brake failure. All these and
>>more can cause accidents.
    
    Blowouts, thankfully, seem to be extremely rare and can be blamed on
    poor maintenance/vehicle checks.  So too for brake failure.
    
    Still, the line between 'negligence' and 'accident' is a point that
    can be argued over forever more, and probably will be.
    
>>All these and more can cause accidents.
    
    This statement will still therefore be true, even if the event is
    caused by some other reason, an accident can still arise from it.
    
    We can all hope that better concentration on all our behalf will help
    to avoid the number of accidents that do occur, however caused...
    
    J.R.

It doesn't matter how hard you concentrate. If you hit a rather slippery patch
like the Diesel, mud, water mix on a corner, you may still not be able to stop
the vehicle aqua-planeing. It was just unfortunate that there happened to be a 
car in the way. All steering had lost effect, so did braking, and so did engine
braking. Mind you the Vauxhall Astra GTI did a very good impression of a brake.


Simon

>>It doesn't matter how hard you concentrate. If you hit a rather slippery patch
>>like the Diesel, mud, water mix on a corner, you may still not be able to stop
    
    Without trying to blame you for the incident, *if* you see an extremely
    slippery patch ahead, you may be able to slow down enough to avoid problems.
    Of course, the operative word here is the 'if'.  You are more likely
    to see the patch if concentrating, but how soon you see it, how far
    away it is, what speed you are doing etc can all mean that you are
    rapidly becoming another accident which you can do little to avoid.
    
    J.R.
    
    PS I have had 'skids' on diesel with both a car and a motorbike.
       In both cases I would say it was more luck than judgement that
       meant I didn't have a proper accident - just a skid.
       Even so, *if* I had spotted the diesel sooner, I probably would
       not have even got into a skid.  Easy to say with hindsight, isn't it ?

    
    I don't agree with that theory. What if you were doing your 70mph down a
    motorway and a deer ran out and headed straight for lane 2 ? I'm sure I
    (and many others in here) could think of a thousand such examples.
    
    Saying that all accidents are caused by poor concentration is nothing but
    total jibberish.
    
    His humblest...
    -Tony

Almost all accidents happen due to driver error. Almost all. Not all.

Dougie

    
    *Almost all* I would agree with.
    
    *All* I would not agree with.

    
    Re .75 - Is this why 'careful?' motorists always stick to the 3rd lane.
    
    
    What does a patch of diesel on the road look like?
    
    
    Chris
    

    
    A lot like black ice. Now the thing I want to be able to spot is the
    driver in front/alongside having a heart attack, This happened to me
    once, There I was minding my own business when a bus driver had a heart
    attack, he came off the Motorway and charged down the embankment
    through the fence and stopped after some 20-30 yards of very heavy
    destruction, scared the shit out of the horses in the field and very
    nearly joined me in the room where I was watching the tele. 
    Sometimes you'll get involved no matter what you do.
      
    

    
    What does black ice look like ?
    
    Black patch in middle of road a slightly different shade to tar or what?
    
    Chris
    

    Re 'all'/'not all' accidents due to lack of concentration.
    
    I wasn't meaning to imply that all accidents can be avoided with 110%
    concentration when driving...
    
    
>>    driver in front/alongside having a heart attack, This happened to me
>>    once, There I was minding my own business when a bus driver had a heart
    
    Extremely unfortunate, not predictable, not nice !
    
    Were their passengers in the bus too ?
    
    J.R.

    
    Nope, just one dead bus driver, fortunately.
    
    The point about oil/diesel/black ice is that its very difficult to see.
    
    As an aside and your not the only person who uses this expression, and
    I do not mean this as an insult at yourselve but I really *HATE* people 
    using the 110% statement, its a purely irrational dislike but it bugs 
    the cr@p outta me. The worst offenders are sportsmen/commentators, our 
    own Murray Walker being a prime example, 100% is all anyone can give,
    unless of course we are talking of mortgage payments.
                                          

What I forget to mention is that it was in the evening, very dark, on an unlit
country lane whilst P---ing down with rain. Were the odds stacked against me or
what.

Simon

	The figure I've heard is that around 95% of accidents are driver error.
	Of course, there is the usual unlucky bugger.  Really, again, it's down
	to attitude; you either drive thinking "nothing can go wrong" or you
	drive thinking "what can go wrong (and what do I do about it)?".  Eg.
	"that person might come out of the side road at me" instead of "that
	person has seen me and will not come out of the side road".

	So, there you are on the motorway and the car in front swerves 
	violently.  If you're holding the wheel with both hands and keeping
	your distance, then you've got a chance.  Of course, an upside down
	transit van coming at you through the motorway barrier is a different
	matter.

	Dave

    
    
    re last couple...
    
    A) advanced driving instructions dictate that a driver should be able
       to stop their vehicle within the distance of vision.
       (if visability is 45-50 feet 30mph is recomended)
    Aa) Diesel, although on dry roads Diesel may be 'invisable' the aroma
        is strong enough to alert a rider of it's presence.
    
    B) The Deer should be observed before it had reached the far edge of the
       hard shoulder, or even the motorway boundry so that It's intentions
       could be 'predetermined'
    
    c) The van: does it overturn in lane 1/2 slide across lanes 2/3 (giving
       presumed direction of travel) and then cross the Armco or
       metamorphosise upside down over the Armco ???
    
    Anyone who travels at 70mph around blind bends and has an accident
    with a upside down deer thats sliding on ice gets no sympathy from me....
    
     Alan.      

    re .86
    
    A) Is that assuming normal road conditions, or worst possible road
    conditions ?
    
    Andrew

    	Its fairly simple really - if you can't stop within the distance
        you can see to be clear, in the prevailing conditions,  then you
        may come unstuck. Similarly, if you remain alert, and concentrate,
    	then you increase your observation and decrease your reaction time,
    	which may just help when that truck full of venison skids on deisel 
    	and crosses the central reservation.
                                                
        Surely its not beyond the wit of man to deduce that on a dark
        night in heavy rain on a country road, you might find a poorly
    	lit corner covered in wet mud...
    
    	William.

re:     Aa) Diesel, although on dry roads Diesel may be 'invisable' the aroma
        is strong enough to alert a rider of it's presence.

In an already smelly Diesel landrover,    :-)

re:     Surely its not beyond the wit of man to deduce that on a dark
        night in heavy rain on a country road, you might find a poorly
    	lit corner covered in wet mud...

Ok so I could have travelled at 5 MPH. At the 25 MPH I thought I was driving 
with 'due care and attention'. It was the fact that I (gently) braked that
caused the wheels to slide. From that point on it is history. And yes the other
party did claim on my insurance. There was another landrover behind me. He also
started to slide. He was still on the straight part of the road so was ok.

Simon (who now specialises in demolishing garden walls)

    One should remember that accidents ARE accidents, it's just that some
    idiots call what are inevitabilities, accidents.
    
    Accidents are when sane considerate drivers, driving to the rules and
    conditions of the road have a "bump"
    
    Inevitabilities are when inconsiderate stupid idiots driving like
    complete Bas***ds have a "bump"

>>In an already smelly Diesel landrover,    :-)
    
    I thought you had a V8 Landy ?
    
    
    J.R. (who has also been in accidents - no great fun)

I do!. I used to have the truck cab deisel. It had a Perkins 4203 in the front.
The Perkins 4203 is a 3.3 Lt with a _huge_ amount or torque. It chewed up two 
gear boxes and the overdrive. I get rid of the Truck cab and now have the V8.

If you want to see what the Perky can do, I have the 'broken' gears from the
first gearbox at my desk.

Simon

    
    So Simon, let me get this straight. Can I deduce from your statements
    that if my vehicle gets into a sideways slide that I cannot correct/get
    out of then I too will demolish a garden wall ??
      Or: if I do something that is outside if my capabilities then it's
    consequences are construed as an accident ??
    
      Alan.

    Regarding .94
    
    The point I was trying to make elsewhere was that Torque is the useful
    stuff whilst BHP (the output of someones calculator) is not.
    
    As to "Expert", I certainly do not consider to be one of those,
    especially when in my book "Ex-spert" is defined by :-
    
    Ex = Hasbeen
    Spert = Drip under pressure
    
    Good Day (English) to you too.
    
    Ian...

    
    This discussion of venison on the road is a bit of a coincidence! - we
    arrived back from our holiday last night in a hire car due to just such
    an 'accident'!  I would consider it a 'real' accident - (but then I was
    driving, so I suppose I'm biased :-)  ) I was concentrating - and I saw
    the deer just as it lept the ditch - but since it was dark, and my
    headlights wern't pointing into the field, (and it wasn't wearing
    flourescent stripes) I couln'd avoid it, hence venison on the menu of
    the local restaurant!!!! The Austrians are so used to this type of
    accident that the deer was collected before our car was - and that was
    only a matter of about half an hour! (See RAC note about how their
    Eurocover works - when I get arround to entering it!)
    
    Elaine

    
    There was an interesting discussion on road accidents on Radio 4
    yeterday lunch times, talking about the very high percentage of
    accidents caused by people falling asleep or just 'switching off' while
    they are driving, especially on motorways.  They said that the peak
    times for this type of accident was between 4-6am, and just after lunch
    time. Did anyone else hear it?

This mornings edition of "Beyond 2000" on SKY News said that in Japan it
is estimated that 30% of fatal road accidents are due to driver fatigue.

Thus those clever little chappies are developing a wrist-watch sized
device that detects your state of conciousness and if you are too sleepy
it radios a central computer. Then a control centre initially warns you
by voice radio and if you don't respond it disables your ignition!

It sounds to me like this could cause more trouble than it saves, and it
wasn't an April fool joke as far as i know.

mb

p.s.

The program was on at 4:30am, which is in the middle of the "peak time",
so maybe i was just suffering from fatigue :-)

ref : New Scientist	4th January 1992

Full article on driver fatigue.


Summary from memeory.

Approx 13% accidents between 4am-6am , average over two hour period is 11%.

Note that considerably less traffic at those times !

Possible cause being awake too long, lorry drivers, although only allowed to
drive 8 hours, could be awake for considerably longer.

Also mentions it is very hard to get figures on sleep related accidents, as
people don't own up to it, or don't realise they had fallen asleep.

Another period to watch for is 2pm-4pm. This is a sleep period for the body,
so things tend to slow down - hence the above average effect of having a
pint at lunch time.

Lots of other things - worth a read if your interested.