Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

How to Use A Roundabout

Options
1161719212224

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Absurdum wrote: »
    this thread is like driving around a roundabout 5 million times in the fast lane without indicating with front fogs on and no road tax whilst out of my head on crack shouting out "Octavias are ghey" at the top of my voice




    No change there then! ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I have already decided that I need to present the OP's example to the RSA. Originally I was trying to determine whether there was an overall conceptual/perceptual problem with the general guidelines. I also thought some other poster had asked the RSA about the OP's roundabout, and that the answer given had just divided opinion again. Now I think it might move things along better if I gave my RSA correspondent the specific example and asked them to (a) say how they would do it, and (b) say why they would do it that way, with reference to the RoTR..

    Yeah thats all I was getting at.. In order to get a specific answer you will need to ask them the specific question.. I cannot fathom how they say there is no conflict, unless you are not talking about the same "sequential" method on specific roundabouts.
    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I'm not sure what you mean by there being "two separate and distinct issues". Sorry if I am just not hearing you on this point. .

    What I mean is.. I don't believe the "sequential" method means the same to the RSA as it does to you for example. I assume they were however aware of some confusion, which is why it was removed from their material. That would be the first issue.. and one they have tried to remedy (albeit not as thoroughly as one would hope).
    The second issue would be why Driving Instructors (and Driving Schools) continue to use outdated method which the RSA had stopped using since 2006. If the RSA decided a change was needed (and we dont know specifically why).. why didnt the Professionals follow suit?
    I believe they are seperate issues, because the RSA now makes no mention of any sequential method, so why is it being taught? On this part the Driving Schools surely must hold their hands up.. the RSA cannot be held 100% liable for this.

    Put simply ... 1st issue is the origin of the misconception.. 2nd issue is the continue proliferation of the misconception after references to the misconception were deleted in 2006.

    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Welease, at the risk of being a bore, can I ask you again about your own driving instruction? How did the instructor actually explain roundabouts to you? What specific words and phrases did s/he use?.

    To be honest it was so long ago (all subsequent licences were mere formalities because I knew how to drive... any lessons didn't include roadcraft) I don't remember the exact words.. but i was always essentially taught.. left and up to (and including) straight ahead is left lane, past that (or right) is right lane onless otherwise indicated.
    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I suspect there's a lot more to putting this issue to rest than the RSA simply spelling out (to us pedants!) what they mean. It's all very well to end a dispute like this one on Boards. If there's a real perception problem out there though among the general motoring population, then that's a challenge in a different league altogether. Have you noticed that posters who emphatically declared their position early on in this thread, and who dissed everybody in the opposing camp, have not been back since? I know it's just a Boards thread and they all have other things for doing, but I can't help feeling that at least some of them just have their minds made up and because they are 'right' they have no real interest in why there might be another group who think the opposite. This roundabout thread may fizzle out and be forgotten like all the others, but for me the real interest lies in trying to understand why there is such conflict and confusion in the first place and searching for a solution.

    Well I did comment on that earlier.. Some will never be told otherwise, and some obviously have been told by respectible agencies like driving schools who they should be expected to believe.. Thats why I don't think it's fair for people to point fingers solely at the RSA and blame them (which seems common practice around here sometimes).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Welease wrote: »
    Yeah thats all I was getting at.. In order to get a specific answer you will need to ask them the specific question.. I cannot fathom how they say there is no conflict, unless you are not talking about the same "sequential" method on specific roundabouts.

    What I mean is.. I don't believe the "sequential" method means the same to the RSA as it does to you for example. I assume they were however aware of some confusion, which is why it was removed from their material. That would be the first issue.. and one they have tried to remedy (albeit not as thoroughly as one would hope).

    The second issue would be why Driving Instructors (and Driving Schools) continue to use outdated method which the RSA had stopped using since 2006. If the RSA decided a change was needed (and we dont know specifically why).. why didnt the Professionals follow suit?

    I believe they are seperate issues, because the RSA now makes no mention of any sequential method, so why is it being taught? On this part the Driving Schools surely must hold their hands up.. the RSA cannot be held 100% liable for this.

    Put simply ... 1st issue is the origin of the misconception.. 2nd issue is the continue proliferation of the misconception after references to the misconception were deleted in 2006.

    To be honest it was so long ago (all subsequent licences were mere formalities because I knew how to drive... any lessons didn't include roadcraft) I don't remember the exact words.. but i was always essentially taught.. left and up to (and including) straight ahead is left lane, past that (or right) is right lane onless otherwise indicated.

    Well I did comment on that earlier.. Some will never be told otherwise, and some obviously have been told by respectible agencies like driving schools who they should be expected to believe.. Thats why I don't think it's fair for people to point fingers solely at the RSA and blame them (which seems common practice around here sometimes).


    Starting with your last point first, I agree that placing all the onus on the RSA does not take into account other contributing factors. However, the ultimate source of the guidelines for roundabouts is the RoTR, and if these were detailed, prescriptive and comprehensive enough there would be nothing to dispute. It is odd, though, that the wordy Irish rules lead to confusion and conflict whereas it seems to be the case that minimalist Dutch and Swedish rules make their roundabouts vastly safer than their ordinary junctions. This is where I think there is a systems problem in Ireland whereby multiple factors combine to generate an outcome different from that expected. Roundabouts should be safer and easier, but large numbers of Irish motorists, cyclists and pedestrians will tell you why they experience the very opposite.

    I submitted some further questions to my RSA contact last night, with specific reference to the OP's roundabout. I anticipate that any response will take a couple of days. In the meantime I am contacting another expert or two for their opinions.

    I appreciate your point regarding the two issues you identify: the apparent simultaneous existence of two incompatible methods for navigating roundabouts, and the apparent continued promotion by driving instructors of an outdated method. It remains to be seen what is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth with regard to both of those issues. However, in my view they are two sides of the same coin.

    An aside: out of curiosity if nothing else, I am pursuing the possibility that these opposing roundabout 'paradigms' (if they really exist!) are due to some sort of perception bias. That may sound like a crackpot theory, but it may well be within the bounds of possibility that there are two sizeable groups of motorists who look at the same guidelines in the RoTR and see quite different things. If you are so inclined, have a look at this webpage and imagine how it might apply to Number-of-Exits adherents reading the RoTR.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭zynaps


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    An aside: out of curiosity if nothing else, I am pursuing the possibility that these opposing roundabout 'paradigms' (if they really exist!) are due to some sort of perception bias. That may sound like a crackpot theory, but it may well be within the bounds of possibility that there are two sizeable groups of motorists who look at the same guidelines in the RoTR and see quite different things. If you are so inclined, have a look at this webpage and imagine how it might apply to Number-of-Exits adherents reading the RoTR.
    The documentation in the ROTR is still just ambiguous enough to leave some room for interpretation either way. If they gave an example more involved than the canonical four-exit compass roundabout, it might remove the problem, but as it stands one can defend their conflicting viewpoint (see antiprocess) by reasoning that the simplistic example in the ROTR does not match the large real-world 5 or 6 exit roundabout they're faced with.

    Also, if the photo earlier in the thread is representative of all Dutch roundabouts, then the well-marked lanes and clear signage should help keep things under control. On many multi-lane roundabouts here, there don't seem to be even lane markings on the roundabout, so simply staying in the correct lane becomes another unneeded judgement call.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭BigEejit


    Indeed, the county councils should always make sure that roundabouts are signposted and roadmarked to remove the confusion that some drivers have. As zynaps says, these are unneeded judgement calls.

    If roundabouts were marked as well as the Dutch one pictured earlier in the thread it would make life much easier for everyone. It may even stop the ignorant bastages who go all the way around roundabouts in the left lane.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    An aside: out of curiosity if nothing else, I am pursuing the possibility that these opposing roundabout 'paradigms' (if they really exist!) are due to some sort of perception bias.

    I think it's much simpler than that. The RotR used to say "first, second, later exits", and many people learned when those were the official rules. Add to that instructors who learned when those rules were official who continue to teach that way, and that's all there is to it.

    The problem is just driver education: like "fast" lanes, foglights, tailgating and so on. Many of the people guilty of these everyday driving sins really don't know any better.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭vibe666


    okay, its time for me to start as i mean to go on.

    i stepped away from the debate for a few days because i was getting too worked up over this whole thing and started taking personal shots at people because they disagreed with me and that was very wrong on my part.

    so, to Vertakill and bbk and anyone else I might have taken an unnecessary dig at, i offer my sincere apologies. it was wrong of me and if i lose the plot and do it again, I heartily encourage anyone to quote this message and ask the mods to get the banhammer out.

    i have already said that when i'm wrong i'm happy to admit my mistakes and its only right that i stand by that assertion so i hope that this is enough to clear the air. :)

    the thing is, now that i've actually caught up with the thread again, i'm all fuuuuuuuuuu and i haven't even posted anything new yet! :D

    i'll try and restrain myself as best i can in any case, for the sake of my own non-banning if nothing else. ;)

    so, what we have now (imho) is further muddied waters BY the RSA making things worse by saying this:
    3. Are the two methods ('new' Clock method versus old Number-of-Exits method) compatible?
    We do not see these as old or new methods both are equally valid and we believe they cannot be used independently of each other.
    seriously, WTF is that supposed to even mean? (and i'm reflecting on what the RSA mean in their reply to Iwannahurl, not him/her for posting it in the thread).

    how can both be equally valid if they CAN'T both be used independently? :confused:

    I've emailed the RSA to ask them to clear things up and for them to create a boards.ie account and ask for the mods promote them so they have an official RSA: bob (or whatever) account so they can answer things in an official capacity.

    i know i'm changing my tone completely here, but how can anyone be expected to know which method to use in ireland when the RSA can't even give a conclusive answer to a simple question without confusing things further?

    BTW, someone asked about the rest of Europe all using the 'clock' method a few pages ago, but i believe someone also used Spain as an example of an EU country that doesn't, which is "technically" correct, but functionally speaking it's like using Joseph Fritzl as a valid alternative method of running a B&B. :D

    I actually drove in Spain for the best part of 4 years and the Spanish system is that you use the outside (relative to the centre) lane of any roundabout to go anywhere except coming 360 degrees right round it to go back the way you came, which is for the inside most lane (back to front, driving on the left anticlockwise layout) so you take the right hand lane if you are going right, straight OR left off the roundabout, but at the same time, if there are two or more lanes entering a roundabout the lanes are also treated by the majority of drivers as the same as if the roundabout wasn't there, so they are just an extension of the motorway lanes making any inside lanes ALSO overtaking lanes :eek: even though you have people on the outside lanes crossing right in front of them to go left. :(

    as far as I am aware, the Spanish 'Kamikaze' system isn't actually in the highway code, but it IS actually taught by driving instructors because everyone (everyone Spanish) does it and if you try and use the regular EU 'clocks' system you'll get t-boned by a Spaniard very quickly, which is a very severe learning experience for other europeans visiting spain who are usually the ones it happens to (a lot).

    there have been several campaigns (admittedly, mostly by the non-spanish contingent) to bring them in line with the rest of europe, but so far it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

    anyway, the short version is that Spain is the exception, or at least very much in the minority and should not be used as a good example for others to follow unless you really want to know what your motor would like like with a Seat Ibiza sticking out of the side of it!

    Also, i think Iwannahurl had asked about the definition of what exactly constituted "straight on", so I did a little (crap, MS Paint) illustration, based on the OP's original picture that shows it as it was taught to me by my driving instructor in the UK when I was 17 (I'm 34 now).

    roundabout-1.jpg

    as far as I am aware, this is the system that has always been in place in the UK for as long back as anyone can remember and although officially speaking the clock method is not mentioned, it is taught as an easy way for anyone to visualise the roundabout based on their relative position and either by looking at the roundabout as they approach, or the signs leading up to it for bigger roundabouts, pick the most appropriate exit from there.

    the important thing for everyone to remember about the clocks method is that it not only makes it easy for you to know which lane to take (if there are no markings to dictate otherwise) it also makes it easy for everyone else (either already on, or preparing to enter/leave) around you to quickly work out based on your relative position and signalling, where you are likely to be going.

    the other important thing to remember is that as it's used (almost) everywhere else you're likely to be driving, you aren't going to have any problems using roundabouts abroad AND people coming here and getting hire cars aren't as likely to drive into you on a roundabout because they think you're going somewhere else. :)

    the other thing is, if the clocks & numbers methods are almost the same, 99% of the time (as has been previously mentioned, why not change your habits to the same as everyone else for that 1% of the time? once the RSA have conclusively cleared up all these muddy waters anyway. ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    BigEejit wrote: »
    Indeed, the county councils should always make sure that roundabouts are signposted and roadmarked to remove the confusion that some drivers have. As zynaps says, these are unneeded judgement calls.
    If roundabouts were marked as well as the Dutch one pictured earlier in the thread it would make life much easier for everyone. It may even stop the ignorant bastages who go all the way around roundabouts in the left lane.


    There seems to be some sort of antipathy towards proper signage and road markings among our various authorities with responsibility for roads. I suspect it has to do with funds. Signs cost money, and as for road markings, sure if you lay those down aren't you only setting yourself up for having to renew them in a few years?

    The NRA has a central role in the design of roundabouts. Refer to their Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Perhaps that's also part of this systemic problem: a plethora of 'competent authorities', little or no coordination, and no accountability as usual.

    It was the NRA that originally gave us chicken-wire crash barriers on the M1, it was the NRA that gave us motorways without service stops (to keep the gombeens happy), and it was the NRA that gifted the people of Dunshaughlin, Co. Meath, with this beauty a while back, when they interfered with basic pedestrian and cycle routes around the village.


    I think it's much simpler than that. The RotR used to say "first, second, later exits", and many people learned when those were the official rules. Add to that instructors who learned when those rules were official who continue to teach that way, and that's all there is to it.

    The problem is just driver education: like "fast" lanes, foglights, tailgating and so on. Many of the people guilty of these everyday driving sins really don't know any better.


    I've already acknowledged that it's probably best to concentrate on finding the simplest possible explanation and hence the simplest solution.

    However, on this particular issue IMO it is overly simple to suggest that it's just a matter of education. If the Rules of the Road manual is not central, why does such a document exist? No, the RoTR is the bible, and the bible must be true or our faith in the system is for nothing.

    I don't want to go all highfalutin about phenomena like Cognitive Dissonance, but in a way it's quite basic and IMO very relevant to the problem at hand.

    If there are large numbers of motorists out there who use an outmoded method of navigating roundabouts, they are not going to change their ways until presented with a clear and unambiguous instruction to do otherwise. Where is that instruction to come from? IMO there seems to be agreement in certain quarters that both the RoTR and the RSA's TV ad are wrong. Numbers/Sequentialists looking at the RoTR and the ad do not see anything that contradicts their current knowledge and beliefs (I should know!). In other words, they experience no 'cognitive dissonance'.

    So what could possibly prompt them to change? There is no mechanism for making all of them (us) go back and take more driving lessons, and in any case it is also not certain that every driving instructor in the country is teaching roundabout navigation properly.

    Enforcement is also crucial, but of what exactly? As usual AGS are practically invisible or at least they are not being proactive in dealing with this recurring problem. There is at least one anecdotal report in this thread about a motorist allegedly being pulled by a Garda for allegedly using the right-hand lane on a roundabout like the OP's.

    BTW, I also emailed two senior Garda officers (one regional, the other national) on Feb 3 to ask for their input. To date I have received neither acknowledgment nor response.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    vibe666 wrote: »
    the other thing is, if the clocks & numbers methods are almost the same, 99% of the time (as has been previously mentioned, why not change your habits to the same as everyone else for that 1% of the time? once the RSA have conclusively cleared up all these muddy waters anyway. ;)



    Fair point, except that the proportions using the different rules may be as much as 50/50 and there is no official guidance insisting that all motorists use the preferred method.

    Now that I have heard about it for the first time, I agree that the Clock method makes intuitive sense.

    For example, I happily used it here for the first time just the other day. I was travelling from top right (of map/photo) to bottom left. Past 12 o'clock, so right lane.

    Dare I ask what others would have done? :cool::):D:p:pac:;):rolleyes::eek::(:mad:

    The trouble is, I'm still watching out for 'the other guy' who is in the left lane, and if any aggro occurs he'll just throw the RoTR at me.

    By the way, just found this Indo article by pure fluke. Wish I'd seen it in 2004, or even just last week for that matter. Here's the text in full:


    Better driving: Negotiating roundabouts by numbers

    Irish Independent, Friday September 03 2004

    WHEN dealing with roundabouts, it is always important to position where road markings indicate. Use the 'clock method' to determine your signal. This is based on the principle that you are always approaching from the 6 o'clock position, which means the exit to your left is 9 o'clock, the road directly in front is 12 o'clock, and the road to the right is 3 o'clock.

    If leaving by the 9 o'clock exit, apply your left indicator and, if road markings allow, approach in the left lane. Maintain your left signal throughout and only cancel it when you exit.


    The normal procedure for taking the 12 o'clock exit is to have no signal as you approach the roundabout in the left hand lane (if road markings allow) and keep in this lane as you negotiate the roundabout. When you are level with the centre point of the 9 o'clock exit, indicate left to exit at 12 o'clock. The other option is to approach in the right-hand lane. Your signals would be the same, but you would maintain the right-hand lane throughout.

    Where a roundabout goes from two lanes on approach to one lane on exit, consider which side of the road narrows. If the road narrows on the left-hand side, for example by the kerb cutting in, then it may be better to select the right-hand lane, as this will allow a smoother line without having to change lanes, and vice versa.

    If leaving by the 3 o'clock exit, you would normally approach in the right-hand lane unless road markings indicate otherwise. Indicate right on approach and maintain this signal until you get level with the centre of the second exit. Then change to a left signal. Where it is safe to do so, leave the roundabout by the left-hand lane. It is very important, however, to stress that you should give way to traffic already in the left-hand lane and if it is not safe to change lanes, remain in the right-hand lane as you exit.

    Going all the way around the roundabout is an extension of taking the 3 o'clock exit but maintain your signal and road position until you get level with the centre point of the 3 o'clock exit, then change your signal to the left and leave by the left-hand lane if it is safe.

    On multi-exit roundabouts, the clock method gives you a flexible guide. If the exit you are taking is to the left, signal left on approach and maintain this signal. If the exit is before 12 o'clock, there is no signal on approach and a left signal when you are exiting. If your exit is past 12 o'clock, signal right on approach and change to a left indicator when you go to leave the roundabout.

    In general, you can usually position in the left hand lane on approach to a roundabout if the exit you are taking is before the 12 o'clock position. You would select the right hand lane on approach if your exit was past the 12 o'clock position. Only where conditions allow, should you leave by the left hand lane.

    Weekly safety advice courtesy Mike Kavanagh, Irish Advanced Motorists


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    I haven't changed my driving based on this thread, but it has lowered my blood pressure a bit.

    Each day, I drive through this roundabout in Galway, coming from the West and turning right on the N6. This signage clearly shows that the N6 is to the right. The road markings clearly show that N6 traffic should be in the right hand lane.

    Yet every day, it's like feckin bumper cars with drivers turning right to the N6 in the left hand lane. I always thought this was just queue-jumping rule-breaking douchebaggery, but now I realize that many people were taught that this is the normal lane to use for a second exit. The lane markings aren't very visible in traffic, and these people may actually think they are driving sensibly.

    Probably not, but it lowers my blood pressure to give them the benefit of the doubt.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    I haven't changed my driving based on this thread, but it has lowered my blood pressure a bit.

    Each day, I drive through this roundabout in Galway, coming from the West and turning right on the N6. This signage clearly shows that the N6 is to the right. The road markings clearly show that N6 traffic should be in the right hand lane.

    Yet every day, it's like feckin bumper cars with drivers turning right to the N6 in the left hand lane. I always thought this was just queue-jumping rule-breaking douchebaggery, but now I realize that many people were taught that this is the normal lane to use for a second exit. The lane markings aren't very visible in traffic, and these people may actually think they are driving sensibly.

    Probably not, but it lowers my blood pressure to give them the benefit of the doubt.



    No matter what rule -- or method, to be more accurate -- they use, they are incorrect if they ignore local signage and road markings. That at least is clear in the RoTR.

    Would Zen Driving or some such help to keep your BP down? :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    No matter what rule -- or method, to be more accurate -- they use, they are incorrect if they ignore local signage and road markings.

    Yes, but as I've commented before in some earlier roundabouts thread, arrows on the road indicating which lane you should be in are not much good in rush hour traffic when there's a queue of cars on top of them.

    To be in the correct lane in many cases, you'd have to do a scouting run in light traffic first, and have your co-driver take pacenotes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    I haven't changed my driving based on this thread, but it has lowered my blood pressure a bit.

    Each day, I drive through this roundabout in Galway, coming from the West and turning right on the N6. This signage clearly shows that the N6 is to the right. The road markings clearly show that N6 traffic should be in the right hand lane.

    Yet every day, it's like feckin bumper cars with drivers turning right to the N6 in the left hand lane. I always thought this was just queue-jumping rule-breaking douchebaggery, but now I realize that many people were taught that this is the normal lane to use for a second exit. The lane markings aren't very visible in traffic, and these people may actually think they are driving sensibly.

    Probably not, but it lowers my blood pressure to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    It shouldn't be like bumper cars as there are two lanes available for traffic throughout the manoeuvre.

    The sequential system would seem to be a more efficient way to move traffic in this roundabout as the N6 traffic (presumably most of the traffic) could use both lanes. Otherwise all the N6 thru traffic has to converge into the right hand lane for the roundabout before spreading out again after.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    The sequential system would seem to be a more efficient way to move traffic in this roundabout

    I agree.

    But that's not how the lanes are marked, and a lot of the N6 traffic wants to be in the left lane after the roundabout, hence the dodgems at the roundabout exit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Here's the text in full:

    Better driving: Negotiating roundabouts by numbers

    Irish Independent, Friday September 03 2004


    The normal procedure for taking the 12 o'clock exit is to have no signal as you approach the roundabout in the left hand lane (if road markings allow) and keep in this lane as you negotiate the roundabout. When you are level with the centre point of the 9 o'clock exit, indicate left to exit at 12 o'clock. The other option is to approach in the right-hand lane. Your signals would be the same, but you would maintain the right-hand lane throughout.

    Where a roundabout goes from two lanes on approach to one lane on exit, consider which side of the road narrows. If the road narrows on the left-hand side, for example by the kerb cutting in, then it may be better to select the right-hand lane, as this will allow a smoother line without having to change lanes, and vice versa.



    Weekly safety advice courtesy Mike Kavanagh, Irish Advanced Motorists

    Glad to see this validated by an advanced motorist as I view either left or right lane as being valid for taking the "12 O'Clock" exit and that's the way I drive. The ROTR however, state that there's no choice in lanes unless the left lane is blocked.....which to me seems unnecessary and an inefficent use of the roundabout.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    It shouldn't be like bumper cars as there are two lanes available for traffic throughout the manoeuvre.

    The sequential system would seem to be a more efficient way to move traffic in this roundabout as the N6 traffic (presumably most of the traffic) could use both lanes. Otherwise all the N6 thru traffic has to converge into the right hand lane for the roundabout before spreading out again after.



    That's where roundabout design and the RoTR must work together.

    Imagine a world where road engineers, "planners", road safety authorities and policy-makers actually collaborated and coordinated...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭zynaps


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    Glad to see this validated by an advanced motorist as I view either left or right lane as being valid for taking the "12 O'Clock" exit and that's the way I drive. The ROTR however, state that there's no choice in lanes unless the left lane is blocked.....which to me seems unnecessary and an inefficent use of the roundabout.
    Agreed, and leaving it more at the driver's discretion reinforces the fact that right-of-way is not clear cut and has to be treated carefully on a roundabout.

    If people are strongly polarised on the subject of which rule must be followed in all cases, I think there's a danger that they will assume "I'm in the correct lane, following the clock/exits/bananas rule, and therefore that guy must give way" and carry on ignoring someone in the 'wrong' lane.

    This kind of fragile, inflexible thinking could be dangerous in itself, compared with having an adaptive, defensive approach where you evaluate the conditions at individual roundabouts as you see fit and make allowances for other drivers doing things differently.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭vibe666


    i think the further we get into it, the worse things seem.

    whilst i still don't (personally) see any issues with the RoTR directions as I apply them to the way I was taught to drive, if nothing else, this thread has opened my eyes to how people *could* find the various instructions from different places a little less than harmonious and it's certainly showing that there is a lot of room for improvement in some form of 'official' direction by the NRA, RSA & whoever else has a hand in this big round pie as far as roundabout design, law & etiquette is concerned.

    after all, there is obviously a reason why after almost 2 weeks of back and forth debate the poll is still almost a dead heat.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    I wonder how many of the 362 members who voted in the poll (up to the time of posting) actually read the thread, in whole or in part?

    IMO most if not all will decide whether they are Rightists or Leftists and leave it at that. However, what's of real interest and importance is that there is such a divide in the first place.

    If it was, say, 90/10 you could dismiss the one-in-tens as muppets, dinosaurs, mavericks, ne'er-do-wells, boy racers, [insert your epithet here].

    50/50 ought to ring alarm bells, but probably won't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I wonder how many of the 362 members who voted in the poll (up to the time of posting) actually read the thread, in whole or in part?

    IMO most if not all will decide whether they are Rightists or Leftists and leave it at that. However, what's of real interest and importance is that there is such a divide in the first place.

    If it was, say, 90/10 you could dismiss the one-in-tens as muppets, dinosaurs, mavericks, ne'er-do-wells, boy racers, [insert your epithet here].

    50/50 ought to ring alarm bells, but probably won't.

    The poll was flawed. There should have been a third option of "Left or Right" which I would have selected.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭vibe666


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    The poll was flawed. There should have been a third option of "Left or Right" which I would have selected.
    but you'd still be wrong to take the left lane at all if *you were using the clock method as the exit in question isn't at 12 o'clock, it's at </> 2:30 (i.e. further round the clock than 12 and therefore not straight thru, but a 'later exit'). :)

    *assume you are as mentioned in your earlier post


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,561 ✭✭✭rickyjb


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    :

    Better driving: Negotiating roundabouts by numbers

    Irish Independent, Friday September 03 2004

    WHEN dealing with roundabouts, it is always important to position where road markings indicate. Use the 'clock method' to determine your signal. This is based on the principle that you are always approaching from the 6 o'clock position, which means the exit to your left is 9 o'clock, the road directly in front is 12 o'clock, and the road to the right is 3 o'clock.

    If leaving by the 9 o'clock exit, apply your left indicator and, if road markings allow, approach in the left lane. Maintain your left signal throughout and only cancel it when you exit.


    The normal procedure for taking the 12 o'clock exit is to have no signal as you approach the roundabout in the left hand lane (if road markings allow) and keep in this lane as you negotiate the roundabout. When you are level with the centre point of the 9 o'clock exit, indicate left to exit at 12 o'clock. The other option is to approach in the right-hand lane. Your signals would be the same, but you would maintain the right-hand lane throughout.

    Where a roundabout goes from two lanes on approach to one lane on exit, consider which side of the road narrows. If the road narrows on the left-hand side, for example by the kerb cutting in, then it may be better to select the right-hand lane, as this will allow a smoother line without having to change lanes, and vice versa.

    Is this guy serious, that's shockingly bad avdvice!!:confused: So you go straight ahead from the right hand lane because there's a kerb "cutting in", in the process cutting somebody off who has taken the correct lane through the roundabout? If there's only one lane how can it be cutting in to either one side or the other, no wonder people can't use roundabouts properly reading rubbish like this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    rickyjb wrote: »
    Is this guy serious, that's shockingly bad avdvice!!:confused: So you go straight ahead from the right hand lane because there's a kerb "cutting in", in the process cutting somebody off who has taken the correct lane through the roundabout? If there's only one lane how can it be cutting in to either one side or the other, no wonder people can't use roundabouts properly reading rubbish like this.

    I think he's talking about anticipation really. If on the exit road the left lane merges into the right, then it would be good forward planning to join the right lane rather than the left.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    -Chris- wrote: »
    If on the exit road the left lane merges into the right, then it would be good forward planning to join the right lane rather than the left.

    Agreed. Note this paragraph from the roundabouts bit of the RotR:
    Sometimes a roundabout exit with two or more lanes may narrow into one lane over a short distance. Drivers in the lane which is terminated should yield to traffic in the other lane.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    rickyjb wrote: »
    Is this guy serious, that's shockingly bad avdvice!!:confused: So you go straight ahead from the right hand lane because there's a kerb "cutting in", in the process cutting somebody off who has taken the correct lane through the roundabout? If there's only one lane how can it be cutting in to either one side or the other, no wonder people can't use roundabouts properly reading rubbish like this.


    Competent drivers are capable of merging. It's not a new concept.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    vibe666 wrote: »
    but you'd still be wrong to take the left lane at all if *you were using the clock method as the exit in question isn't at 12 o'clock, it's at </> 2:30 (i.e. further round the clock than 12 and therefore not straight thru, but a 'later exit'). :)

    *assume you are as mentioned in your earlier post

    No I'm a die hard sequential practitioner.....excpet where conditions dicate otherwise :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    vibe666 wrote: »
    but you'd still be wrong to take the left lane at all if *you were using the clock method as the exit in question isn't at 12 o'clock, it's at </> 2:30 (i.e. further round the clock than 12 and therefore not straight thru, but a 'later exit'). :)

    *assume you are as mentioned in your earlier post



    "After 12 o'clock" is sufficient information. :)


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    No I'm a die hard sequential practitioner.....excpet where conditions dicate otherwise :D


    If I had my way the RoTR would be dictating otherwise! Instead what we have now is a case of divide and misrule.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    In a PM to me someone suggested that it would be relatively simple and inexpensive to redo the voiceover on the RSA roundabout ad in order to educate all drivers about the new and correct rules. I'm not sure how workable that would be if the ambiguous RoTR document remains in circulation, but it got me wondering anyway.

    How would you rewrite the script?




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    Shouldn't that roundabout have two lanes marked on it as there are two lanes approaching it ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,062 ✭✭✭Slick50


    -Chris- wrote: »
    I think he's talking about anticipation really. If on the exit road the left lane merges into the right, then it would be good forward planning to join the right lane rather than the left.

    He's talking baloney, if there is only "one lane on the exit", you should be in the left lane as you approach.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement