Lane hogging

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-08-2015 8:27pm

This post has been deleted.

thomur · 30-08-2015 8:28pm

Pov06 wrote: »

No it does not.

You should drive on the M2 at about 7 pm some day. You will see most people easily do 160 km/h and there are no problems at all.

Motorway driving is as safe as it gets. People do crazy speeds in Germany and don't have problems. Slow drivers are the issue, especially when they're in the wrong lane.

Speed doesn't kill. Are you serious. At 30km 1 in 10 dies, at 60km 9 in 10 dies. Read up on it

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 8:28pm

thomur wrote: »

Speed doesn't kill. Are you serious. At 30km 1 in 10 dies, at 60km 9 in 10 dies. Read up on it

Yes exactly, at 100 km/h how many die? 10/10?

Makes no difference so if I'm doing 200 km/h.

Maybe if people didn't use the wrong lane and observed before changing lanes there would be no crashes.

Falcon L · 30-08-2015 8:28pm

Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
•
a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);
•
a passenger vehicle with seating for more than eight passengers;
such as a bus; or
•
a vehicle towing a trailer, horsebox or caravan.

This from the RSA booklet: tinyurl.com/pyjgl5q quoted today on the Garda twitter feed.

Jesus. · 30-08-2015 8:28pm

thomur wrote: »

I drive legally

But you don't. You admitted that in your first comment

OldMrBrennan83 · 30-08-2015 8:30pm

This post has been deleted.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:31pm

thomur wrote: »

Speed doesn't kill. Are you serious. At 30km 1 in 10 dies, at 60km 9 in 10 dies. Read up on it

That relates to chances of pedestrian surviving a hit by a car with those speeds.

What we are talking about here, are motorway speeds which are much higher, as well as there are no pedestrians on motorways.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 8:32pm

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sure by their logic they should just sit in lane 3 doing the speed limit and they will be world heroes.

Then said hero goes to lane 1 as they need to get off the motorway and they don't even check the mirrors.

CRASH

Speeder kills innocent people once again. HA.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:33pm

Falcon L wrote: »

Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
•
a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);
•
a passenger vehicle with seating for more than eight passengers;
such as a bus; or
•
a vehicle towing a trailer, horsebox or caravan.

This from the RSA booklet: tinyurl.com/pyjgl5q quoted today on the Garda twitter feed.

I said above that RSA kept publishing incorrect info in their booklets for 5 years after law was amended.
Buses are allowed to use any lane on motorway since 2009.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:35pm

thomur wrote: »

28 years driving with no issues so disagree with your point about poor driving. I drive legally and Im not trying to sort out the law breakers but likewise if you speed then don't give out about other people who break the law

You say you drive legally, but half an hour ago, you admitted to driving on middle lane, when vehicles overtake you on both sides.
That's not driving legally.

Also how can you be sure you are at speed limit.
Maybe you are on overtaking lane doing 119km/h and someone would be happy to use the chance to overtake you doing 120km/h - don't you think?

thomur · 30-08-2015 8:35pm

CiniO wrote: »

That relates to chances of pedestrian surviving a hit by a car with those speeds.

What we are talking about here, are motorway speeds which are much higher, as well as there are no pedestrians on motorways.

Cmon. Ok a car travelling towards a pedestrian at 60km or a car sideswiping you at 100km per hour. I don't fancy my chances in either

Falcon L · 30-08-2015 8:36pm

CiniO wrote: »

I said above that RSA kept publishing incorrect info in their booklets for 5 years after law was amended.
Buses are allowed to use any lane on motorway since 2009.

That's a current RSA document, quoted just today on the Garda twitter account.

You're right and the RSA and Gardai are wrong?

slimjimmc · 30-08-2015 8:38pm

Falcon L wrote: »

Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
•
a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);
•
a passenger vehicle with seating for more than eight passengers;
such as a bus; or
•
a vehicle towing a trailer, horsebox or caravan.

This from the RSA booklet: tinyurl.com/pyjgl5q quoted today on the Garda twitter feed.

Doesn't apply to buses with no standing passengers.
The law prohibits vehicles with a limit of 90km/h or lower from the outer lane but buses with no standing passengers have a limit of 100km/h on motorways and so are allowed in the outer lane.
Buses with standing passengers have a much lower speed limit and so are banned from the outer lane.

thomur · 30-08-2015 8:39pm

CiniO wrote: »

You say you drive legally, but half an hour ago, you admitted to driving on middle lane, when vehicles overtake you on both sides.
That's not driving legally.

Also how can you be sure you are at speed limit.
Maybe you are on overtaking lane doing 119km/h and someone would be happy to use the chance to overtake you doing 120km/h - don't you think?

Most of the time I will travel on the left lane and pull aside to let people pass me(One single lane roads if possible). It just kills me that its like Carmageddon on the first few miles of the M4/N4(Whatever its called). So dangerous

rizzodun · 30-08-2015 8:43pm

Pov06 wrote: »

No it does not.

You should drive on the M2 at about 7 pm some day. You will see most people easily do 160 km/h and there are no problems at all.

Motorway driving is as safe as it gets. People do crazy speeds in Germany and don't have problems. Slow drivers are the issue, especially when they're in the wrong lane.

Don't be so naive, speed does kill, you're mixing that up with infrastructure that allows a faster speed to be maintained safely.

160km/h is safer on a three lane flat motorway with oncoming traffic seperated where it would be more dangerous on an uneven two lane road with oncoming traffic, purely down to the likelyhood of something causing you to lose control. If you crash on either at 160km/h there's a good chance you'll lose your life.

Falcon L · 30-08-2015 8:43pm

slimjimmc wrote: »

Doesn't apply to buses with no standing passengers.
The law prohibits vehicles with a limit of 90km/h or lower from the outer lane but buses with no standing passengers have a limit of 100km/h on motorways and so are allowed in the outer lane.
Buses with standing passengers have a much lower speed limit and so are banned from the outer lane.

The RSA booklet says nothing about speed limits with/without passengers, just what I quoted above. If they're wrong, shouldn't someone tell them?

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:47pm

Falcon L wrote: »

That's a current RSA document, quoted just today on the Garda twitter account.

You're right and the RSA and Gardai are wrong?

Exactly.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 8:48pm

rizzodun wrote: »

Don't be so naive, speed does kill, you're mixing that up with infrastructure that allows a faster speed to be maintained safely.

160km/h is safer on a three lane flat motorway with oncoming traffic seperated where it would be more dangerous on an uneven two lane road with oncoming traffic, purely down to the likelyhood of something causing you to lose control. If you crash on either at 160km/h there's a good chance you'll lose your life.

See - speed doesn't kill. Loss of control - maybe.

The same can happen at any speed

Falcon L · 30-08-2015 8:48pm

CiniO wrote: »

Exactly.

Wow.

GTE · 30-08-2015 8:51pm

thomur wrote: »

It just kills me that its like Carmageddon on the first few miles of the M4/N4(Whatever its called). So dangerous

So why do you add to the issues on the N4 by knowingly taking up an overtaking lane when you know there are people in the cruising and second overtaking lane going faster than you?

Context:

thomur wrote: »

Try the M4. I always travel at the speed limit in the middle lane and constantly being undertook and overtook on both sides

Oh. . .

thomur wrote: »

Ok, maybe my lack of knowledge but I always thought it was for people who were exiting at the next exit

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:56pm

Falcon L wrote: »

Wow.

Like what can I say.
It's not my fault that they publish incorrect info, is it?

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 8:58pm

bbk wrote: »

So why do you add to the issues on the N4 by knowingly taking up an overtaking lane when you know there are people in the cruising and second overtaking lane going faster than you?

Context:

See that's the thing. People like him say "I've been driving for 28 years" and they won't even go to the trouble of actually reading up the rules of the road because they think they are a driving master.

As one person on Boards put it a while ago: Every mile you drive is a new experience and it is more experience gained on the road. That's not to say you are a perfect driver. Every single mile you drive you learn to drive better but never master it.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 8:59pm

rizzodun wrote: »

If you crash on either at 160km/h there's a good chance you'll lose your life.

Pretty much the same if you crash at 120km/h.
Very little chance you will survive an impact at such speed.
Even at 100km/h chances of surviving are minimal.
Does that mean that we all should drive 30km/h max even on motorways, just because in case we crash, this makes us more likely to survive?

Seth Brundle · 30-08-2015 9:01pm

thomur wrote: »

28 years driving with no issues so disagree with your point about poor driving. I drive legally and Im not trying to sort out the law breakers but likewise if you speed then don't give out about other people who break the law

28 years driving without knowing the basics!
By driving in the middle lane with no traffic on your left, you are not driving legally. Ask any garda!

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:02pm

CiniO wrote: »

Pretty much the same if you crash at 120km/h.
Very little chance you will survive an impact at such speed.
Even at 100km/h chances of surviving are minimal.
Does that mean that we all should drive 30km/h max even on motorways, just because in case we crash, this makes us more likely to survive?

Don't even get me started on revving the car past 3000 RPM.

Jayziz, the bleedin' engine will implode and the wheels will fall off.

rizzodun · 30-08-2015 9:02pm

CiniO wrote: »

Pretty much the same if you crash at 120km/h.
Very little chance you will survive an impact at such speed.
Even at 100km/h chances of surviving are minimal.
Does that mean that we all should drive 30km/h max even on motorways, just because in case we crash, this makes us more likely to survive?

No, I'm just pointing out the statement that speed doesn't kill is a load of bull. Of course you have to take precautions where you can and also accept the risks same with flying in a plane etc. Infrastructure reduces the risk but the speed can still kill if something goes wrong.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:03pm

rizzodun wrote: »

No, I'm just pointing out the statement that speed doesn't kill is a load of bull. Of course you have to take precautions where you can and also accept the risks same with flying in a plane etc. Infrastructure reduces the risk but the speed can still kill if something goes wrong.

What ever goes wrong is what kills. Not the speed. You are contradicting yourself in every post.

If the wheels fall off on the motorway you will be fcuked regardless of your speed.

Seth Brundle · 30-08-2015 9:03pm

thomur wrote: »

It just kills me that its like Carmageddon on the first few miles of the M4/N4(Whatever its called). So dangerous

Personally, l believe that a lot of it is frustration with limited options to overtake because of numpties driving in the middle lane equally oblivious to others on the road and to the rules.

rizzodun · 30-08-2015 9:04pm

Pov06 wrote: »

See - speed doesn't kill. Loss of control - maybe.

The same can happen at any speed

Loss of control at 30km/h can will be unlikely to kill you though.

Jesus, some of the waffle that goes on in this forum sometimes.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:05pm

rizzodun wrote: »

Loss of control at 30km/h can will be unlikely to kill you though.

Jesus, some of the waffle that goes on in this forum sometimes.

Driving at 30 km/h on any motorway will probably kill you because someone will drive into you at 100 km/h.

Seth Brundle · 30-08-2015 9:05pm

Just to add my €0.02 to the speed debate, speed makes any incident end up worse

Speed itself doesn't kill. However crashing at 120km/h will have most of an effect than crashing at 80km/h

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:07pm

kbannon wrote: »

Just to add my €0.02 to the speed debate, speed makes any incident end up worse

Speed itself doesn't kill. However crashing at 120km/h will have most of an effect than crashing at 80km/h

That can be argued.

For instance:
Car A is travelling at 80 km/h
Car B is travelling at 120 km/h

What happens during a side-swipe? A big collision.

Now:
Car A is travelling at 120 km/h
Car B is travelling at 120 km/h

What happens during a side-swipe? A small tap. If both drivers steer away from each other everything should be fine.

rizzodun · 30-08-2015 9:07pm

Pov06 wrote: »

Driving at 30 km/h on any motorway will probably kill you because someone will drive into you at 100 km/h.

Ffs I'm pointing out the difference in loss of control at 30km/h and 100km/h plus, not advocating 30km/h motorway speed limits, you said speed doesn't kill, I'm pointing out that it does, and it's backed up with numerous studies and data as you know.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:09pm

rizzodun wrote: »

Ffs I'm pointing out the difference in loss of control at 30km/h and 100km/h plus, not advocating 30km/h motorway speed limits, you said speed doesn't kill, I'm pointing out that it does, and it's backed up with numerous studies and data as you know.

This whole thread is related to motorway driving though. Nobody said you should be driving at 160 km/h on a back road. You'd be a numpty to do 30 km/h on a motorway too.

rizzodun · 30-08-2015 9:09pm

Pov06 wrote: »

That can be argued.

For instance:
Car A is travelling at 80 km/h
Car B is travelling at 120 km/h

What happens during a side-swipe? A big collision.

Now:
Car A is travelling at 120 km/h
Car B is travelling at 120 km/h

What happens during a side-swipe? A small tap. If both drivers steer away from each other everything should be fine.

This is complete bollocks, two cars touch at 120km/h there's a big chance one or both will lose control due to the high speed the cars are travelling.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:10pm

rizzodun wrote: »

This is complete bollocks, two cars touch at 120km/h there's a big chance one or both will lose control due to the high speed the cars are travelling.

The only loss of control that could be caused is both drivers steering far too much away from each other.

The cars could easily handle a side tap at the same speed though. Remember there is no speed difference between the two cars.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 9:13pm

rizzodun wrote: »

Loss of control at 30km/h can will be unlikely to kill you though.

.

Yes, but there must be some golden mean between absolute safety, and speed of travel.
When motorway is properly designed and drivers properly trained, driving at 200km/h is safe enough to justify extra benefit of quick travel.

In general in my opinion currently roads in Ireland are safe enough and there's hardly any point in going crazy by lowering speed limits to save few lifes.
You are way more likely to die of cancer, some other kinds of disease, or just having accident in your own home like falling of the stairs, than dying in car accident.

dr.fuzzenstein · 30-08-2015 9:20pm

rizzodun wrote: »

Ffs I'm pointing out the difference in loss of control at 30km/h and 100km/h plus, not advocating 30km/h motorway speed limits, you said speed doesn't kill, I'm pointing out that it does, and it's backed up with numerous studies and data as you know.

Since the normal speed on a motorway is 120 km/h, those studies and the data do not apply.
If I lose control at 120 km/h and crash into a concrete barrier, I am fcuked.
The same applies if I lose control at 140, 160, 180, 200, I could go on.
But your statement "speed kills" is factually incorrect. I drove at 240 km/h once. Did the fact that I was driving at that speed kill me? No, unless I am very much mistaken (and that is always possible), I am currently alive and writing this.

Also, if we follow the "speed kills" brigade argument, their logic absolutely is aiming at a blanket 60 km/h speed limit for every vehicle on every road of the entire country. Because even one life saved would make it worth it, no?
Logically there is no argument against. Several hundred people a year get killed, we could get this figure down to ZERO immediately! Wouldn't it be worth it? The lives saved, the fuel saved, it would save us billions!
Anyone who argues against wants people to die and would have to be viewed as a murderer.

mudstack · 30-08-2015 9:25pm

Pov06 wrote: »

If you crash at the speed limit you will also probably kill someone and be killed yourself.

The speed is not the cause of the crash. Lack of driving skills is the problem when people think the lane they drive in is decided based on the weather.

I was in Germany 2 weeks ago and we were doing 180 km/h on a section that was probably worse than most of the national roads/motorways in Ireland. We came across scattered suit cases on the motorway and everyone slowed from from 180 (and even more, we were in the middle lane and there were people doing a lot higher speeds in the overtaking lane) to rolling speed with zero issues. No crashes or dead people. So, speed does not kill.

Lack of driving skills and speed are a bigger problem than lack of driving skills alone.
People who think they are great drivers are often a big problem too.

You have less time to react or manoeuvre away from a problem at a higher speed. There will always be human error, we are not robots.

You may have not been involved in an accident Germany 2 weeks ago.

A 2008 report by the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) found that of the 645 road deaths in Germany in 2006, 67% occurred on on motorway sections without limits and 33% on stretches with a permanent limit.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:27pm

mudstack wrote: »

Lack of driving skills and speed are a bigger problem than lack of driving skills alone.
People who think they are great drivers are often a big problem too.

You have less time to react or manoeuvre away from a problem at a higher speed. There will always be human error, we are not robots.

You may have not been involved in an accident Germany 2 weeks ago.

A 2008 report by the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) found that of the 645 road deaths in Germany in 2006, 67% occurred on on motorway sections without limits and 33% on stretches with a permanent limit.

Yes I agree, I may not have enough time to react or manoeuvre away from a middle lane hogger who jumps into lane 1 without checking their mirrors.

Legally it's my fault for undertaking. Personally and factually I would still say the lack of knowledge of the ROTR by the middle lane hogger is the cause of the crash, not my speeding.

Sam Kade · 30-08-2015 9:28pm

harr wrote: »

On M50 today not often up that part of the country the amount of cars hogging the overtaking lanes ,one in particular a young lady in a ford KA causing all sorts of problems she was going no more than 40km in the far right over taking lane.
Got stuck behind her for about 2km no choice in end but to over take on the inside ...anyway just as I was undertaking her a traffic cop flies up behind us and pulls her over but where does she try pull over....yep pull ups on the right ..cops had to guide her over to hard shoulder ..
Same cop car pulled over a merc driving in over talking lane further up the M50 was not causing any problems and keeping to the speed limit but got pulled I presume for being in the wrong lane.
Good to see the cops pulling for this...is the M50 always this bad ?

That's called undertaking

mudstack · 30-08-2015 9:33pm

Pov06 wrote: »

Yes I agree, I may not have enough time to react or manoeuvre away from a middle lane hogger who jumps into lane 1 without checking their mirrors.

Legally it's my fault for undertaking. Personally and factually I would still say the lack of knowledge of the ROTR by the middle lane hogger is the cause of the crash, not my speeding.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:36pm

mudstack wrote: »

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Well I'm just driving on a clear road with no issues and a lane hogger pulls out in front of me.

Nothing wrong with my driving :rolleyes:

mudstack · 30-08-2015 9:41pm

Pov06 wrote: »

Well I'm just driving on a clear road with no issues and a lane hogger pulls out in front of me.

Nothing wrong with my driving :rolleyes:

If you were driving at the speed limit and not speeding, you'd have more time to react to someone pulling out in front of you or maybe it wouldn't be an issue at all if you weren't speeding and you wouldn't be endangering other peoples lives.

You might feel differently if someone speeding excessively crashed into the back of your son or daughter killing them.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:43pm

mudstack wrote: »

If you were driving at the speed limit and not speeding, you'd have more time to react to someone pulling out in front of you or maybe it wouldn't be an issue at all if you weren't speeding and you wouldn't be endangering other peoples lives.

You might feel differently if someone speeding excessively crashed into the back of your son or daughter killing them.

That still doesn't change the fact the someone changed lane without checking their mirrors/blindspots.

I cannot anticipate other people's actions. The same could happen if I was doing 120 km/h in lane 3 and someone in lane 2 pulls out in front of me.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 9:45pm

mudstack wrote: »

If you were driving at the speed limit and not speeding, you'd have more time to react to someone pulling out in front of you or maybe it wouldn't be an issue at all if you weren't speeding and you wouldn't be endangering other peoples lives.

And if you drove at only half a speed limit, you would have even more time to react. We can go on like that for ages.
Speed limit is no guarantee of any safety. It's just a random number that someone though will be appropriate.
Safe driving has nothing to do with obeying the limit really.
Very often you might be a danger below speed limit, and often you might be perfectly safe above speed limit.

You might feel differently if someone speeding excessively crashed into the back of your son or daughter killing them.

To be honest with yout, it would make no difference for me whatsoever if person who crashed into my son and daughter and killed them did it while being above speed limit or within speed limit or even at half speed limit. No difference whatsoever.

mudstack · 30-08-2015 9:46pm

Pov06 wrote: »

That still doesn't change the fact the someone changed lane without checking their mirrors/blindspots.

I cannot anticipate other people's actions. The same could happen if I was doing 120 km/h in lane 3 and someone in lane 2 pulls out in front of me.

They may have checked their mirrors and assumed you were far enough behind to pull out, but unfortunately you being the tool that you are were driving well beyond the speed limit and knocked them into traffic or into a pole in the middle of the road.

Pov06 · 30-08-2015 9:49pm

mudstack wrote: »

They may have checked their mirrors and assumed you were far enough behind to pull out, but unfortunately you being the tool that you are were driving well beyond the speed limit and knocked them into traffic or into a pole in the middle of the road.

Remember, I'm not the tool hogging the middle lane. If you like hogging the middle lane you should realise you are an accident waiting to happen.

Not my problem. Any time I undertake I am ready to shoot into the hard shoulder.

CiniO · 30-08-2015 9:49pm

mudstack wrote: »

A 2008 report by the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) found that of the 645 road deaths in Germany in 2006, 67% occurred on on motorway sections without limits and 33% on stretches with a permanent limit.

Brilliant. 33% of deaths on German motorways are on stretches with permanent speed limit.

Now let's look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn where it clearly says that stretches of autobahn with permanent speed limit accounts for - guess what - 33%.

What it means - it means that chances of dying on autobahn are exactly the same on restricted or not restricted parts of it, so speed limit makes no difference whatsoever.

mudstack · 30-08-2015 9:50pm

CiniO wrote: »

And if you drove at only half a speed limit, you would have even more time to react. We can go on like that for ages.
Speed limit is no guarantee of any safety. It's just a random number that someone though will be appropriate.
Safe driving has nothing to do with obeying the limit really.
Very often you might be a danger below speed limit, and often you might be perfectly safe above speed limit.

To be honest with yout, it would make no difference for me whatsoever if person who crashed into my son and daughter and killed them did it while being above speed limit or within speed limit or even at half speed limit. No difference whatsoever.

Yes you would have time more time to react and thats the reason for speed limits, I'm glad you finally see the point of speed limits.

A lot of people would absolutely care that the person who crashed into their family member/friend was speeding.

Lane hogging

Comments