Tractors at rush hour

run_Forrest_run

whisky_galore wrote: »

Not rush hour then so what's the problem? If they stuck to the small bye roads people will be p*ssing and moaning about them as well. What are they supposed to do? Fly? Levitate? Imagine a lot of these guys are agricultural contractors, rather than farmers.

flying tractors...imagine the mess, it's bad enough dealing with bird shít

Dannyboy83

Ludo wrote: »

I doubt that somehow. Motorways have a limit of 120kmph but have a minimum of 50kmph. Therefore can't possibly see how 65kmph on a 100kmph limit road can in any way be classed as dangerous. And no way would a guard pull someone for it or be able to prosecute them in any way much an all as they might want to.

If you recall from your driving test, there is an error category called Progress, which can cause a driver to fail their test, as it is unsafe driving.

Many (fatal) accidents are caused by a phenomenon called Traffic Bunching.
Traffic Bunching is alleviated by keeping traffic at a constant speed.

A vehicle such as a tractor which creates a potential hazard to other drivers, should drive with their hazard lights on.

I'm not aware of any penalty points for failure to make progress, but you can certainly receive a caution from the Gardai.

The legislation is so similar to the UK, that I imagine you can probably be fined also, altho I don't know the specifics.

In the UK, you can receive penalty points:

Can you be fined for driving too slow?

Although there is no minimum speed limit on the majority of UK roads, you can still be fined for driving too slow if it is seen that you are a hazard to other road users.
There is no specific penalty for driving too slowly and as such, penalties may be as little as a verbal warning by a police officer along with a lecture of the dangers of driving too slow and in more serious cases, a motorist may find themselves in court charged with driving without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other road users (penalty code CD30). The more serious penalty CD30 comes with penalty points on a motorists licence, anywhere from 3 to 9 along with a fine

Ludo

That all sounds nice and official but it is still something you are inventing yourself with no legal standing. It is not unsafe driving and it is not dangerous driving and I am guessing no tractor driver has been prosecuted in any way for simply driving on a dual carriageway. Show me an official source if there is one.

whisky_galore

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

A vehicle such as a tractor which creates a potential hazard to other drivers, should drive with their hazard lights on.

I see a lot of tractors that have flashing yellow lights fitted.

Like it or not, they're entitled to use the road just as much as a car is. They pay motor tax too.

ganmo

whisky_galore wrote: »

I see a lot of tractors that have flashing yellow lights fitted.

Like it or not, they're entitled to use the road just as much as a car is. They pay motor tax too.

from 1/1/16 they will have to have beacons

hoodwinked

whisky_galore wrote: »

Like it or not, they're entitled to use the road just as much as a car is. They pay motor tax too.

just because you are paying motor tax does not mean you have to use all the roads, people seem to forget common sense in these situations,

if your vehicle has a maximum speed of 50km/h don't go on roads where the average speed is above that figure, common sense.

there are reasons we have restrictions on motorways, politics means we don't have these restrictions on dual carriageways (some of which have speed limits of 120km/h) but common sense would say if a road is 100-120km/h slow moving traffic should avoid it if at all possible.

just because you have the "right" to be on that road, doesn't remove your "responsibility" to not go on that road if you know you will be a hazard, which you are if you are unable to maintain the average speed.

ganmo

hoodwinked wrote: »

if your vehicle has a maximum speed of 50km/h don't go on roads where the average speed is above that figure, common sense.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=htFlFWHmn8M

All tractors are capable of doin 50, the larger new tractors can do 80 the only thing stopping them goin faster is the breaks

mik_da_man

hoodwinked wrote: »

just because you are paying motor tax does not mean you have to use all the roads, people seem to forget common sense in these situations,

if your vehicle has a maximum speed of 50km/h don't go on roads where the average speed is above that figure, common sense.

there are reasons we have restrictions on motorways, politics means we don't have these restrictions on dual carriageways (some of which have speed limits of 120km/h) but common sense would say if a road is 100-120km/h slow moving traffic should avoid it if at all possible.

just because you have the "right" to be on that road, doesn't remove your "responsibility" to not go on that road if you know you will be a hazard, which you are if you are unable to maintain the average speed.

By that logic then tractors should surely avoid going on roads that are 80km/hr as they can mostly only do 50. So what roads does that leave them with?

I can see the sense in avoiding motorways, but the south link at rush hour is fair game imo, in reality the average speed is well below 100 anyway.

As said above tractors are big, the majority have beacons and all will soon. If someone can't spot them on dual carriageways then I'd question their ability to drive.

Plus on a large road you have the opportunity to pass a lot easier.

Also a lot of the smaller roads around the south ring are in built up areas, not designed for large heavy vehicles. They are a lot better off on the dual carriageway imo.

cantdecide

mik_da_man wrote: »

As said above tractors are big, the majority have beacons and all will soon. If someone can't spot them on dual carriageways then I'd question their ability to drive.

We can probably call it Darwinistic [is that even a word?] if one car can't avoid one tractor on a dual carriageway in fair weather but it isn't fair to suggest that it isn't borderline a little messy when two lanes of fast moving bumper to bumper traffic condense into one chaotic ball all trying to scramble to avoid getting stuck or trying get unstuck. You can easily see a flashing beacon a quarter mile away on the N25 in the morning and not get a gap to overtake. That's how heavy the traffic can be.

mik_da_man wrote: »

So what roads does that leave them with? They are a lot better off on the dual carriageway imo.

Outside of rush hour, why not I passed tractors on Tuesday morning and again that evening and you wouldn't believe the chaos- there was none... because I was on the road at 9.30am and returned at 6.50pm so there was no problems whatsoever but an hour before either of times there would have been chaos.

Ludo wrote: »

They aren't dangerous in and of themselves but they make other people at like idiots.

In the same way that guns aren't dangerous but shooting somebody is?

Ludo

cantdecide wrote: »

In the same way that guns aren't dangerous but shooting somebody is?

LOL...no. You know there is a massive difference there so don't even bother trying to make a comparison. Tractors serve a purpose other than killing people on dual carriageways.

Lambofdave

ganmo wrote: »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=htFlFWHmn8M

All tractors are capable of doin 50, the larger new tractors can do 80 the only thing stopping them goin faster is the breaks

All tractors are not capable of doing 50km some are only able to do 40km, 80km is far to fast for a tractor bar being on a dual carriageway or motorway in Ireland.
The breaking systems are there just some farmers/contractors are too cheap to put air breaks on trailed equipment or abs brakes on trailed equipment going over 50km, but the new rules will take care of that.

Lambofdave

hoodwinked wrote: »

just because you are paying motor tax does not mean you have to use all the roads, people seem to forget common sense in these situations,

if your vehicle has a maximum speed of 50km/h don't go on roads where the average speed is above that figure, common sense.

there are reasons we have restrictions on motorways, politics means we don't have these restrictions on dual carriageways (some of which have speed limits of 120km/h) but common sense would say if a road is 100-120km/h slow moving traffic should avoid it if at all possible.

just because you have the "right" to be on that road, doesn't remove your "responsibility" to not go on that road if you know you will be a hazard, which you are if you are unable to maintain the average speed.

Do you have a lead foot?

whisky_galore

If they're oh so dangerous, where are all the news stories about multi vehicle pile-ups and collisions caused by tractors?

Dannyboy83

Ludo wrote: »

That all sounds nice and official but it is still something you are inventing yourself with no legal standing. It is not unsafe driving and it is not dangerous driving and I am guessing no tractor driver has been prosecuted in any way for simply driving on a dual carriageway. Show me an official source if there is one.

Your claim was that cannot be classed as unsafe or dangerous driving.
I have said that it can be, based on the opinion of a Garda and that there is a legal provision in place.
You are implying that this would apply specifically to a tractor, but in fact it applies to all vehicles (this is typically the way legislation works in this country).

Official source as requested:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/act/pub/0028/sec0004.html

Road Traffic (No. 2) Act 2011

“Driving without reasonable consideration.

51A.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence.

Careless driving.

52.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and—

(a) in case the contravention causes death or serious bodily harm to another person, he or she is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to a fine not exceeding €10,000 or to both, and

(b) in any other case, he or she is liable on summary conviction to a class A fine.

(3) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person has committed an offence under this section and that the contravention has caused death or serious bodily harm to another person, he or she may arrest the first-mentioned person without warrant.

Dangerous driving.

53.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place in a manner (including speed) which having regard to all the circumstances of the case (including the condition of the vehicle, the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then actually is or might reasonably be expected then to be in it) is or is likely to be dangerous to the public.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and—

(a) in case the contravention causes death or serious bodily harm to another person, he or she is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine not exceeding €20,000 or to both, and

(b) in any other case, he or she is liable on summary conviction to a class A fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.

(3) In a prosecution for an offence under this section or section 52, it is not a defence to show that the speed at which the accused person was driving was not in excess of a speed limit applying in relation to the vehicle or the road, whichever is the lower, under Part 2 of the Road Traffic Act 2004 .

(4) Where, when a person is tried on indictment or summarily for an offence under this section, the jury, or, in the case of a summary trial, the District Court, is of the opinion that he or she had not committed an offence under this section but had committed an offence under section 52, the jury or court may find him or her guilty of an offence under section 52, and he or she may be sentenced accordingly.

(5) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person has committed an offence under this section, he or she may arrest the person without warrant.

Dannyboy83

whisky_galore wrote: »

I see a lot of tractors that have flashing yellow lights fitted.

Like it or not, they're entitled to use the road just as much as a car is. They pay motor tax too.

I neither expressed like nor dislike.
I merely countered the false claim that it cannot be considered unsafe or dangerous driving.

Your 2nd claim does not necessarily follow.
All vehicle users pay some form of motor tax, yet there are many specific restrictions based on both the driver status and vehicle status, per road designation.

Ludo

So how many tractors have been stopped and prosecuted under the dangerous driving laws for simply driving on a dual carriageway or other N road? Does your garda acquaintance stop every one he sees as they must be all breaking the law of what you say is true.

j8wk2feszrnpao

hoodwinked wrote: »

people seem to forget common sense in these situations,

Common sense would be to know that they have a right to be there. Slow down if required when you come up behind one, move to the outside lane in a safe manner, over take, and move back into the driving lane again.

I've been driving on that road for a number of years, the accidents I've come across have not involved tractors, but dangerous drivers who go too fast, or don't have the common sense to drive in a safe manner.

You can see it every morning when you approach the tunnel after passing Little Island. There's a huge amount of drivers that cut into the middle lane (to go into the tunnel) from the Dublin lane, at the last possible moment, with plenty of near misses. There's far too many people who can't leave 5-10mins earlier, or just drive safely.

Dannyboy83

Ludo wrote: »

Does your garda acquaintance stop every one he sees as they must be all breaking the law of what you say is true.

You seem to be misinterpreting the legislation.

There is nothing in the legislation to suggest that a tractor is prohibited from using a dual carriageway or that stipulates specific x in situation y is prohibited, in the manner you are suggesting.

• A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place.
• A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without due care and attention.
• A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place in a manner (including speed) which having regard to all the circumstances of the case (including the condition of the vehicle, the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then actually is or might reasonably be expected then to be in it) is or is likely to be dangerous to the public.

So how many tractors have been stopped and prosecuted under the dangerous driving laws for simply driving on a dual carriageway or other N road?

I have absolutely no idea, but I suspect it is rare.
The vast majority of agricultural machinery operators around Cork, ime, are careful and considerate drivers, but more importantly, they tend to be based in small communities and wouldn't want to risk annoying their neighbours.

Dannyboy83

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Common sense would be to know that they have a right to be there. Slow down if required when you come up behind one, move to the outside lane in a safe manner, over take, and move back into the driving lane again.

I've been driving on that road for a number of years, the accidents I've come across have not involved tractors, but dangerous drivers who go too fast, or don't have the common sense to drive in a safe manner.

You can see it every morning when you approach the tunnel after passing Little Island. There's a huge amount of drivers that cut into the middle lane (to go into the tunnel) from the Dublin lane, at the last possible moment, with plenty of near misses. There's far too many people who can't leave 5-10mins earlier, or just drive safely.

An even bigger issue, ime, is the amount of drivers who now seem to disobey red lights in the city.
I regularly see drivers speeding through intersections when I've already got a green, so I've had to adjust my driving as a precaution.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

An even bigger issue, ime, is the amount of drivers who now seem to disobey red lights in the city.
I regularly see drivers speeding through intersections when I've already got a green, so I've had to adjust my driving as a precaution.

It's the same issue in both cases, lack of enforcement.
One camera at the approach to the tunnel would pay for itself the first morning.

Ludo

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

An even bigger issue, ime, is the amount of drivers who now seem to disobey red lights in the city.
I regularly see drivers speeding through intersections when I've already got a green, so I've had to adjust my driving as a precaution.

Definitely. At certain lights now I deliberately wait a few seconds before moving off on green as I see way too many people breaking them. It has saved me an accident a couple of times already.

AugustusMinimus

Can't understand how anyone thinks having tractors or cyclists on the SRR during rush hour is safe. Caused huge traffic congestion and potential pile ups with people stuck behind the tractors trying to pull out into fast traffic.

People on here seem to think the world is an idyllic place where everyone follows the rules of the road. The real world is very different. Mixing very slow traffic with fast traffic at rush hour on what is effectively an urban motorway is dangerous and wouldn't be condoned anywhere else in the world. The SRR should have motorway restrictions place on it.

Lambofdave

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Can't understand how anyone thinks having tractors or cyclists on the SRR during rush hour is safe. Caused huge traffic congestion and potential pile ups with people stuck behind the tractors trying to pull out into fast traffic.

People on here seem to think the world is an idyllic place where everyone follows the rules of the road. The real world is very different. Mixing very slow traffic with fast traffic at rush hour on what is effectively an urban motorway is dangerous and wouldn't be condoned anywhere else in the world. The SRR should have motorway restrictions place on it.

Should tractors go through the city then? Until there is actual crashes caused by tractors or more likely by people who can't cope with other traffic then what your saying is baseless.

cantdecide

Lambofdave wrote: »

Should tractors go through the city then? Until there is actual crashes caused by tractors or more likely by people who can't cope with other traffic then what your saying is baseless.

I have virtually no connection to anyone that runs agricultural equipment or plant. I stand as an irritated motorist/ citizen genuinely concerned for the safety of people I love in the face of what I believe to be selfish thoughtlessness [be-grand attitude] for other road users- I reiterate that the thread title specifies "at rush hour".

Out of curiosity, can you [EDIT: or any of the pro-tractors-at-rush-hour posters on this thread] say that you're completely impartial in your opinion and standing and that no agenda or motive exists in guiding your stance? Genuine question btw.

EDIT: of course I may wonder what posters who ignore my question might have answered...

Lambofdave

cantdecide wrote: »

I have virtually no connection to anyone that runs agricultural equipment or plant. I stand as an irritated motorist/ citizen genuinely concerned for the safety of people I love in the face of what I believe to be selfish thoughtlessness [be-grand attitude] for other road users- I reiterate that the thread title specifies "at rush hour".

You're concern is touching I'm sure, but you really are too much, if you can't handle all traffic scenarios during rush hour maybe avoid rush hour. It is irritated drivers who take risks not tractor drivers and if you get irritated so easily, maybe you should be addressing that issue, and not blaming tractors.

cantdecide wrote: »

Out of curiosity, can you [EDIT: or any of the pro-tractors-at-rush-hour posters on this thread] say that you're completely impartial in your opinion and standing and that no agenda or motive exists in guiding your stance? Genuine question btw.

Pro tractor at rush hour , is there a 3rd referendum on may 22nd no one told me about?

What motive or agenda do I have by not caring if tractors are on the road during rush hour? Are you serious?

AugustusMinimus

Lambofdave wrote: »

Should tractors go through the city then? Until there is actual crashes caused by tractors or more likely by people who can't cope with other traffic then what your saying is baseless.

I've seen it numerous times on the SRR. Slow moving traffic such as tractors causing traffic chaos and obvious near missed. And who says this hasn't caused an accident before?

2 simple questions for you.

1. Would you walk the length of the SRR including areas without hard shoulders and if not, why not ?.
2. Do you believe tractors and other vehicles not capable of 50kph should be allowed onto motorways, and if not, why not ?

I get the impression you're not living in the real world where huge variances in the speed of traffic hugely increases the risks and festivity of accidents.

Lambofdave

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

I've seen it numerous times on the SRR. Slow moving traffic such as tractors causing traffic chaos and obvious near missed. And who says this hasn't caused an accident before?

What you have seen is bad drivers not being able to cope with a tractor on the road, the tractor didn't cause the near misses the drivers not driving correctly did.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

2 simple questions for you.

Two silly questions I may say.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

1. Would you walk the length of the SRR including areas without hard shoulders and if not, why not ?.

Why would I be walking there, I have a car and tractor and if you knew how much i detested driving the SRR and the city because of the idiots that are on it, you would know I only go there when I have no other choice like all other drivers and i guess tractor drivers.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

2. Do you believe tractors and other vehicles not capable of 50kph should be allowed onto motorways, and if not, why not ?

The SRR isn't a motorway so you question is moot. And besides there is alternative routes like the old main roads instead of the motorways , whats the alternative for the SRR?

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

I get the impression you're not living in the real world where huge variances in the speed of traffic hugely increases the risks and festivity of accidents.

I live in the real world very much so, it is you that isn't because your focused on one point to suit your argument we can all do that, but the reality is there is no way tractors can be banned from SRR because there is no alternative route for them to go.

So find another hobby horse.

cantdecide

Lambofdave wrote: »

You're concern is touching I'm sure, but you really are too much, if you can't handle all traffic scenarios during rush hour maybe avoid rush hour. It is irritated drivers who take risks not tractor drivers and if you get irritated so easily, maybe you should be addressing that issue, and not blaming tractors.



Pro tractor at rush hour , is there a 3rd referendum on may 22nd no one told me about?

What motive or agenda do I have by not caring if tractors are on the road during rush hour? Are you serious?

So you're not impartial?

Lambofdave

cantdecide wrote: »

So you're not impartial?

I take it you think your impartial.

cantdecide

Lambofdave wrote: »

I take it you think your impartial.

Outside of the obvious safety aspect can you suggest any ulterior motives I [or anyone else] could have for disliking tractors driving slowly on main thoroughfares at rush hour?