Undertaking on a motorway. Is it unsafe (not is it legal)?

Saruman

I was just thinking about this today. It probably has come up before but here goes.

Forget about the law, I am not interested in what the law has to say. I know that passing a car in the left hand lane is illegal so moving on.

Is it actually unsafe and if so why?

I am not talking about weaving in and out of traffic here by the way. I am simply putting a normal scenario forward.

You are driving in the left hand lane, as you should be on a dual carriageway or motorway. All of a sudden you notice some moron doing about 60kph in the overtaking lane.

Is it really unsafe to just keep going, keeping an eye on said moron and pass him or are you really expected to slow down to the same speed as him on a 120kph motorway or even move in behind him and hope the moron moves in the the left hand lane?

What about a 3 or 4 lane motorway? We have them now. There could be two lanes of empty carriageway in between you in the far left hand lane and the moron in the far right idling along at a snails pace. Is all traffic on the motorway expected to slow down to his speed until he moves over to the left to be legally overtaken?

I have heard people say this is the case but it seems crazy to me.

Would the no undertaking laws in this country not have been written before we had ever dreamt of having a dual carriageway in this country let alone 3 and 4 lane carriageways? In which case safety is not an issue?

Just curious.

The only safety issue I can think of is that someone in the right hand lane might not pay as much attention when moving to the left as when they move to the right and I am sorry but to me that is their problem if they are not paying attention to their surroundings.

Alun

Saruman wrote: »

It probably has come up before...

Only about once a month at least

R.O.R

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055902272

Hopefully a Mod can shut this thread down before it all kicks off again.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055909855
also has a good bit of b1tching and mis-information on the subject too.

Anan1

Saruman wrote: »

The only safety issue I can think of is that someone in the right hand lane might not pay as much attention when moving to the left as when they move to the right and I am sorry but to me that is their problem if they are not paying attention to their surroundings.

It becomes your problem when they hit you. Another danger is that the kind of person who needlessly blocks the overtaking lane is likely to be less observant than the average driver, further raising the likelihood of a collision.

In summary - yes, undertaking is dangerous, but what are your other options? Become part of a rolling roadblock, essentially. I undertake myself, but I always have an escape route and I always use the horn so that at least the car being undertaken knows that i'm there.

Anan1

R.O.R wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055902272

Hopefully a Mod can shut this thread down before it all kicks off again.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055909855
also has a good bit of b1tching and mis-information on the subject too.

I'll let this run for now as it deals only with the safety or otherwise of undertaking, not the legality.

old_aussie

I do it all the time in Australia when it's safe and it's also legal to do so.

Wossack

Anan1 wrote: »

It becomes your problem when they hit you. Another danger is that the kind of person who needlessly blocks the overtaking lane is likely to be less observant than the average driver, further raising the likelihood of a collision.

In summary - yes, undertaking is dangerous, but what are your other options? Become part of a rolling roadblock, essentially. I undertake myself, but I always have an escape route and I always use the horn so that at least the car being undertaken knows that i'm there.

the horn, and a one finger wave..? :P

Sean Quagmire

In some cases, its safer to undertake as you have MORE visilbility and less of a blind spot when looking left.

The UK will soon have a Zig Zag system in place on some roads were you can undertake and overtake.

Zubeneschamali

Saruman wrote: »

Is it actually unsafe and if so why?

In the US it's legal, and I don't think it is dangerous, but it leads to a whole freeway moving at the same speed. I'd rather that didn't happen here.

If people are allowed pass on the left, there's no reason for anyone to keep left, so all lanes will end up travelling at the speed of the slowest in each lane.

To make progress faster than the slowest drivers, you have to weave a lot. Not such a problem on the US freeways, since all lanes tend to break the speed limit unless they are congested, but over here it would be a disaster.

Saruman

I know it is allowed in the US from driving there. I have tried to stick to the Law as it stands in Ireland but found it is simply not the case there, probably because of this very reason. Morons not sticking to the lane they are supposed to be in. They have had multi carriage roads for a lot longer than we have so I think they have it right.

Like I said I am not looking for the legality here, which I believe is only illegal because it is based on an antiquated perception of safety from before the days of multi lane roads here.

Anan1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In the US it's legal, and I don't think it is dangerous, but it leads to a whole freeway moving at the same speed. I'd rather that didn't happen here.

If people are allowed pass on the left, there's no reason for anyone to keep left, so all lanes will end up travelling at the speed of the slowest in each lane.

To make progress faster than the slowest drivers, you have to weave a lot. Not such a problem on the US freeways, since all lanes tend to break the speed limit unless they are congested, but over here it would be a disaster.

Let's confine this to IS IT UNSAFE TO UNDERTAKE, HERE?, thanks. All the rest has been done to death in other threads already, as per R.O.R.'s post.

peasant

It is safe to assume the the driver blocking the outside lane is an idiot.

It is unsafe to assume that you can undertake an idiot safely, as they are highly likely to perform the most dangerous maneuvre imagineable once startled.

Me, I never undertake (but then again I don't travel on motorways / dual carriageways that often)

Zubeneschamali

Anan1 wrote: »

Let's confine this to IS IT UNSAFE TO UNDERTAKE, HERE?

As long as it remains illegal, no.

If it's made legal and everyone is doing it, then yes, that would make our roads less safe.

Anan1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

As long as it remains illegal, no.

If it's made legal and everyone is doing it, then yes, that would make our roads less safe.

I'd be very interested to hear the reasoning behind this?

Saruman

Personally I wing it. I rarely undertake if I can avoid it but sometimes it is just unavoidable.

I always drive in the left lane and only overtake in the right. Even on the M50 I stick to the left lane and then move right in to each lane as needed and since so many idiots stick to the middle lane, this often involves going from the far left travelling lane (not the slip lane) across to the far right to overtake the car in the middle lane which I think is more dangerous than simply staying in the left hand lane at the speed I was going.

Zubeneschamali

Anan1 wrote: »

I'd be very interested to hear the reasoning behind this?

Right now, drive left/pass right is the default. Overtaking the occasional right-lane hogger on the left is a thing we do consciously, after checking the risks, and it's fairly rare outside congested areas like the M50.

If it's legal and normal to pass left or right, there'll be no reason for slow drivers to keep left, and making progress will require weaving around the slowpokes in all lanes. On a three lane road, this will involve multiple fast cars weaving through slow cars on both left and right sides. Recipe for disaster.

Anan1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Right now, drive left/pass right is the default. Overtaking the occasional right-lane hogger on the left is a thing we do consciously, after checking the risks, and it's fairly rare outside congested areas like the M50.

If it's legal and normal to pass left or right, there'll be no reason for slow drivers to keep left, and making progress will require weaving around the slowpokes in all lanes. On a three lane road, this will involve multiple fast cars weaving through slow cars on both left and right sides. Recipe for disaster.

You haven't been on the M50 any time recently, have you?;)

Zubeneschamali

Anan1 wrote: »

You haven't been on the M50 any time recently, have you?;)

The M50 is exactly why I said "rare outside the M50" and "recipe for disaster".

The Big Red Button

If I'm on a dual carriageway and there's an idiot sitting in the outside lane, I usually move out behind him and indicate right (while keeping a safe distance back), maybe flash the lights if necessary. It usually works eventually. I don't think I'd chance undertaking if they didn't move in. If they're that ignorant and unobservant not to notice me in the first place, I just wouldn't trust their driving enough to undertake.

If it's a three lane motorway and they are in the middle lane and I am in the first, I will overtake properly, going all the way out to the third lane and moving back in to the first. It's feckin annoying, but I do it anyways. Occasionally I see them moving back into the first lane after I do so, generally not though.

If it's a three lane motorway and I am in the first lane and they are sitting in the third, I would consider it safe to undertake (if no Gardai are in sight!) as you have the middle lane as a margin of safety, as such.

What really bothers me, though, is when I come onto a three lane motorway in heavy traffic, where the second and third lanes are barely moving but the traffic is light in the first lane. I mean, what can you do? Slow yourself to the snails pace in the other two lanes and thus holding up the other drivers behind you - obviously not! Now I'm aware that there is some rule that you may undertake when there's slow-moving traffic in the outside lane(s), but how slow is "slow"?! And if an idiot decides to pull into the first lane from the second right in front of me, who is liable? (Assuming that the traffic in the second lane is barely moving, I am going at or below the speed limit, and they literally left it impossible for me to avoid a collision.)

Mr. Presentable

It is unsafe to do so. Why?

You are required to overtake on the right, so that is where other drivers will expect you to do so, thus passing on the left will be unexpected to the passee and therefore unsafe.

Saruman

nipplenuts wrote: »

It is unsafe to do so. Why?

You are required to overtake on the right, so that is where other drivers will expect you to do so, thus passing on the left will be unexpected to the passee and therefore unsafe.

You could make the case that if the moron in the overtaking lane is so ignorant as to be unaware of the legal need for him to be in the left hand lane then they might be as ignorant if the legality surrounding undertaking.

Anyway again, that is down to the legality and is not what I am interested in. Only the safety and it seems that safety is not an issue unless you bring the legality in to question.

So the point being, we should allow undertaking on dual carriageways and especially on multi lane roads like the M50, N7 etc

robbie_998

Anan1 wrote: »

It becomes your problem when they hit you. Another danger is that the kind of person who needlessly blocks the overtaking lane is likely to be less observant than the average driver, further raising the likelihood of a collision.

In summary - yes, undertaking is dangerous, but what are your other options? Become part of a rolling roadblock, essentially. I undertake myself, but I always have an escape route and I always use the horn so that at least the car being undertaken knows that i'm there.

Ok, so your on the outside lane of a motorway and someone isn't traveling at near the speed limit and you'd like to overtake them, but they won't move away.

Ok so lets undertake them. I change lanes into the left lane and continue ahead of them, now bearing in mind its not really undertaking because you do have your own lane after all and if the person in the overtaking lane decides to move out of other peoples way and into one of the normal driving lanes then maybe they should be look into the lane their driving so they wouldn't hit anybody because essentially your just driving in a lane they wish to pull into but of course at the same time if they do want to get in in front of you then you should probably slow down and let them in, then once safe back out into the overtaking lane and get by them.

Thats more or less what i would do anyway if they tried to get into a slower lane but if they continued to sit in the overtaking lane then i would pass them out on a inner lane as long as its safe.

btw, i didn't see the other threads posted above.. just wanna take this one as it is.

peasant

robbie_998 wrote: »

driving lanes then maybe they should be look into the lane their driving so they wouldn't hit anybody

Even if they do look (a feat which most of these idiots are not capable of) at the most dangerous point in the whole maneuvre (while you're sitting on their rear quarter and a collission would result in both vehicles spinning uncontrollably) you will be in their blind spot.

That's what makes it so bloody dangerous.

robbie_998

peasant wrote: »

Even if they do look (a feat which most of these idiots are not capable of) at the most dangerous point in the whole maneuvre (while you're sitting on their rear quarter and a collission would result in both vehicles spinning uncontrollably) you will be in their blind spot.

That's what makes it so bloody dangerous.

in which case 3/4 lane motorway just move over another lane they proceed ahead of them.

As for 2 lane motorways/dual carriage ways I wouldn't try it but if your already in the left lane and just driving faster and you have a clear road ahead of you but you see in the right lane they are going a bit slower than you do you really slow down ? being in the situation most people would think nothing of it and proceed ahead but on just two lanes its risky stuff but at the same time its really irritating being stuck like that.

peasant

It's also kinda irritating being dead or plugged into a life support machine for years

djimi

Is it actually considered undertaking if you are in the left lane doing under the speed limit and in the course of your driving you happen to pass out a car going slower than you in the right hand lane? Im not taking about moving back into the left hand lane in order to pass them, I mean simply continuing in the lane you were in.

Mr. Presentable

Saruman wrote: »

You could make the case that if the moron in the overtaking lane is so ignorant as to be unaware of the legal need for him to be in the left hand lane then they might be as ignorant if the legality surrounding undertaking.

Anyway again, that is down to the legality and is not what I am interested in. Only the safety and it seems that safety is not an issue unless you bring the legality in to question.

So the point being, we should allow undertaking on dual carriageways and especially on multi lane roads like the M50, N7 etc

Oh, we should allow overtaking in whatever lane, left/right. But what I am saying is, because it is not allowed other users are not expecting to be undertaken, thus it is unsafe. I could merely have said it is unsafe, but thought to bring more to the table, such as why (IMO). We are talking generally, of the majority, not just the numpty who doesn't know to keep left.

stevenmu

Personally I think it is dangerous. Because overtaking on the left is illegal (or at least not the standard practice), people don't generally expect their to be somebody overtaking them on the left. In addition to this the type of people who hog the overtaking lane tend to not be the sharpest tools in the shed and are often just drifting along completely oblivious to their surroundings and other road users. The two combined can lead to people in the overtaking lane pulling back into the left lane without checking their mirrors/blind spots.

I've seen this happen a number of times. I've also seen people pull into the overtaking lane when they shouldn't, but less often I think.

Buffman

Here's what undertaking can result in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie2oG4pFrXk

Sky News

A truck driver who was caught on video careering along a motorway at 60mph with a car trapped on its front bumper has been cleared of any wrongdoing.
The clip, viewed by half a million YouTube fans, shows Mr Tomlinson's 40-tonne tanker pushing a blue Renault Clio as it hurtles along the A1(M) in Yorkshire.
At one point, sparks are seen flying from the car which was being driven by a woman who had been attempting to undertake the lorry.
John Tomlinson, a commercial driver for 29 years, was praised for being "cool and calm" in the crisis during a Traffic Commission hearing to decide if he should keep his HGV licence.

Sean Joyce, Mr Tomlinson's solicitor, described how Rona Jane Williams, a vet from York, was joining the southbound carriageway of the A1(M) at junction 44 when the incident happened on January 13.
Quoting her statements to police, Mr Joyce explained that her lane of the slip road merged into the middle lane of the motorway.
He added: "She saw Mr Tomlinson's HGV in the middle lane as she came off a slip road on to the carriageway.
"She was effectively performing an undertaking manoeuvre as she joined the lane."
Ms Williams told police she felt a "bump" as the vehicles came together and her car pivoted 90 degrees.

Mr Tomlinson remained oblivious of the car under its cab and continued driving until a motorist in a 4x4 pulled ahead of the vehicles and began flashing his hazard lights.
Mr Joyce said: "Mr Tomlinson remains unable to offer any explanation simply because he was unaware of the collision... He simply did not hear anything, see anything, or feel anything."
Mr Tomlinson, from Clitheroe, Lancashire, appeared close to tears as he spoke of his relief after the hearing.
He described the pressure of the investigation as "indescribable".
In a statement, Mr Joyce said his client had been "wholly vindicated of any wrongdoing".

jimmycrackcorm

I believe that it is just as safe as overtaking. My rationale is that most people seemingly indicate left when someone comes up behind them in the inner lanes which suggests they are actively doing the same thing as overtaking, i.e. mirrors, indicator. If, as other posters suggest, they are lackadaisic about moving back into the correct lane then this behaviour wouldn't be so common place. Also, a middle lane driver happily sauntering on is every unlikely to make a sudden lane change left because they only do so when traffic conditions force them to do so.

There is of course the issue of a blind spot but that occurs for both overtaking and undertaking and as more of these type of incidents occur when overtaking, you could suggest that overtaking is more unsafe than undertaking.

jimmycrackcorm

Buffman wrote: »

Here's what undertaking can result in.


Sean Joyce, Mr Tomlinson's solicitor, described how Rona Jane Williams, a vet from York, was joining the southbound carriageway of the A1(M) at junction 44 when the incident happened on January 13.
Quoting her statements to police, Mr Joyce explained that her lane of the slip road merged into the middle lane of the motorway.
He added: "She saw Mr Tomlinson's HGV in the middle lane as she came off a slip road on to the carriageway.
"She was effectively performing an undertaking manoeuvre as she joined the lane."
Ms Williams told police she felt a "bump" as the vehicles came together and her car pivoted 90 degrees.

She unsafely pulled right in front of the truck instead of merging into the lane at a safe distance. The exact same thing would have occurred had she been overtaking the truck and then pulled in suddenly although the HGV driver would have had a better chance of seeing her next to the drivers side, the fault still is due to merging too closely.

My interpretation of unsafe undertaking in this discussion is of travelling faster on the left lane and not necessarily about pulling back into lane once passed.

Victor

For the various reasons given, I would be very wary of over-taking on the left. You just don't know what the person will do, possibly including coming to a complete stop and/or doing a u-turn.

If you absolutely have to pass someone on the left, give them a very wide berth, preferably a lane width or more.

"Slow" in the context of passing on the left means slow (10-30km/h depending on road type), not slower than the other person.

One situation I saw on the M1 into Belfast, was with both lanes pretty much full, with the left lane doing about 60mph and the right lane doing about 70. Gradually, the right lane dropped speed to below that of the left lane. I don't see a particular problem with that as traffic was essentially travelling in queues and there was little manoeuvring between lanes. Oddly, if the road was quieter, with more opportunities to move between lanes, the situation would have been more dangerous.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

There is of course the issue of a blind spot but that occurs for both overtaking and undertaking and as more of these type of incidents occur when overtaking, you could suggest that overtaking is more unsafe than undertaking.

But the vast majority of overtaking manoeuvres are on the right, so the rate of incidents on the right will be lower.

Saruman

So is the general concesus among most people that

1. undertaking is dangerous but only because it is illegal so unexpected.
2. undertaking should be allowed on multi lane carriageways and maybe on dual carriageways.
3. people using the overtaking lane as a driving lane are morons and deserve to end up like the woman the truck pushed along for a few km.

Or am I reading more in to people agreeing with me?

And ignoring the rest.

Zubeneschamali

Saruman wrote: »

1. undertaking is dangerous but only because it is illegal so unexpected.
2. undertaking should be allowed on multi lane carriageways and maybe on dual carriageways.

I actually said the exact opposite earlier:

1. Undertaking where really necessary is safe today but only because it is illegal (and hence, rarely needed),
2. Undertaking should remain illegal, or overtaking on either side will get more difficult and dangerous.

I do take the point that the M50 is pretty much a lost cause, and we're already past my point 2 there.

I would far, far rather see the traffic corps enforcing the current rules than see the rules changed to allow undertaking.

Anan1

Saruman wrote: »

So is the general concesus among most people that

1. undertaking is dangerous but only because it is illegal so unexpected.
2. undertaking should be allowed on multi lane carriageways and maybe on dual carriageways.
3. people using the overtaking lane as a driving lane are morons and deserve to end up like the woman the truck pushed along for a few km.

Or am I reading more in to people agreeing with me?

And ignoring the rest.

Afraid so, IMO.

1. Undertaking is dangerous, both because it can be unexpected and because it can put faster-miving traffic between a driver and their exit.
2. Undertaking should remain illegal and the current laws re lane discipline should be enforced.
3. People using the overtaking lane as a driving lane should be ticketed.

Victor

Saruman wrote: »

2. undertaking should be allowed on multi lane carriageways and maybe on dual carriageways.

Your comment is rather ambiguous. A dual carriageway is a road with two carriageways, that is two pieces of (typically) asphalt divided by a median. Each can have any number of lanes. Lanes are typically divided by painted lines.

D_murph

I've done it a few times when the clown in front would absolutely just not get in the proper lane and we were the only 2 cars around.

Once was at night and after flashing the lights a few times (how can you be that blind/ignorant?) and still no joy :rolleyes:.

The trick is to do it while giving the clown a wide berth and do it as quickly as possible (in terms of the actual manoeuvre itself) so that if they do something unexpected, you have not been beside them too long and the chances of an accident are reduced.

The way I look at it is, if the driver of the car hogging the overtaking lane is so unaware of their surroundings that they cannot see you in their RVM, then chances are they are likely to do something stupid no matter which side you pass them on.

Just because something is unsafe does not mean it is impossible .

jenizzle

The M50 is very much a lost cause.

I undertake, I must admit. Not very often, mind, but sometimes it's necessary. It stills astounds me to this day how oblivious people are. If I do need to undertake, I would aim to get the maneuver done as quickly as possible.

I always drive with the assumption that everyone else on the road is an idiot, at least that way I like to think I'm prepared for any eventuality.

Saruman

jenizzle wrote: »

I always drive with the assumption that everyone else on the road is an idiot, at least that way I like to think I'm prepared for any eventuality.

Ah but everyone else on the road is an idiot

I wonder how many of the right lane hoggers are truly oblivious and how many are just sticking to their guns and refusing to move.

stevenmu

Saruman wrote: »

Ah but everyone else on the road isin adiot

No, but the safest way to drive is to assume they are

I wonder how many of the right lane hoggers are truly oblivious and how many are just sticking to their guns and refusing to move.

I suspect most of them are truly oblivious, and that they think they are getting to their destination faster by driving in the "fast" lane (assuming they're even capable of that level of thought).

Saruman

stevenmu wrote: »

and that they think they are getting to their destination faster by driving in the "fast" lane (assuming they're even capable of that level of thought).

Reminds me of when we are kids and we get new runners and think we can run like the wind.

ironclaw

Anan1 wrote: »

Afraid so, IMO.

1. Undertaking is dangerous, both because it can be unexpected and because it can put faster-miving traffic between a driver and their exit.

But that begs the question, you should allow ample time and ample distance to be in the left lane to leave by a slip road. An undertake lasts a few seconds, if even.

I see plenty of people, every day, rush to over take me to simply take the next exit when it would be much safer to just back off and pull in behind me. That in my opinion is more dangerous that undertaking someone.

3. People using the overtaking lane as a driving lane should be ticketed.

Agreed. Its daft. I'm regularly behind people doing 80km/ph in the extreme right lane on the 120km/ph sections of the M50.

djimi

Saruman wrote: »

Ah but everyone else on the road isin adiot

Most people, certainly on the roads I drive, do little to back up this statement Im afraid...

Saruman

djimi wrote: »

Most people, certainly on the roads I drive, do little to back up this statement Im afraid...

Amazing how a typo can change a sentence. I fixed it in my post but it is supposed to agree that everyone else is an idiot.

Sean Kinvarra

The reason anti undertakers think it's highly dangerous is because of blind spots
If there was no such thing as blind spots would you thing it would be safe?

There is no law to say you cannot drive right up to and in line with the hogger.
So what's the danger when you are past his blind spot? If he decides to move into your lane and hits you then it is he who is fully responsible for the crash.

On a duel carriage way with bus lane in use. Buses and taxis moving at 60kmh and private vehicles 40kmh You want to change to inside lane and turn left ahead. Bus lane comes to end. If buses and taxis don't slow down to your speed wouldn't they be putting passengers lives at risk as well as your own, by undertaking? And yes, it IS undertaking!

Chimaera

Sean Kinvarra wrote: »

The reason anti undertakers think it's highly dangerous is because of blind spots
If there was no such thing as blind spots would you thing it would be safe?

There is no law to say you cannot drive right up to and in line with the hogger.
So what's the danger when you are past his blind spot? If he decides to move into your lane and hits you then it is he who is fully responsible for the crash.

On a duel carriage way with bus lane in use. Buses and taxis moving at 60kmh and private vehicles 40kmh You want to change to inside lane and turn left ahead. Bus lane comes to end. If buses and taxis don't slow down to your speed wouldn't they be putting passengers lives at risk as well as your own, by undertaking? And yes, it IS undertaking!

This is an ancient thread but I'll take the chance.

Bus lanes are always separated by a solid white line which you are not allowed to cross regardless of whether it's operating as a bus lane or not. This makes it a separate carriageway: it may as well have a wall there.

Given that vehicles may not cross the white line the speed differential is a non-issue.

Merge points between bus lanes and normal lanes are one place where undertaking could legitimately occur and motorists should be extra aware around them.

visual

Watching a few Russian car crash videos should give all the answers to why undertaking is dangerous.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Can't be dangerous, sure it is commonplace here and in the UK, and is 100% legal in some countries.

If it were legal here, then it would be more safe however, as the mongo hogging the overtaking lane would know that he could be passed on either side.