Tailgating and Undertaking on Motorways

Dravokivich

This kind of carry on isn't limited to motorways. I don't drive on any and see it all over the place around Dublin/Kildare. Driver sees an empty road and wants to eat it up, or pass anything before'em to eat up the empty road ahead.

Anyone who's considering the op's behavior to be justification for the undertake described needs to think long and hard about what they are saying. It's valid to put oneself and others into a risky position, because one was provoked by what one perceived as the inaptitude of another driver?

I'd rather give'em all the room I could between me and them. Preferably in front of me.

knucklehead6

bmwguy wrote: »

Whatever about most Irish people not being able to drive on motorways I think some of the responses here have highlighted a more pressing problem, most of you can't read!

The OP did nothing wrong except for possibly exceeding motorway limit. You all want her to do a violent lane merge the instant she was finished overtaking. Cop on to yourselves.

Fact - she was in overtaking lane when she was overtaking. No problem there. Doing slightly above motorway limit which is ok in my

Fact - she said she was getting ready to merge back left but was undercut by someone's impatience immediately.

FACT: She was in the overtaking lane long enough after completing an overtaking manoeuvre that someone behind her had enough time to contemplate, initiate and complete an under taking manoeuvre.

All the while accelerating to what the op reckons was 180km/h.

It'd be some van to accelerate to 180 from whatever speed the op was doing in such a short distance as she is alleging.

Dravokivich

knucklehead6 wrote: »

FACT: She was in the overtaking lane long enough after completing an overtaking manoeuvre that someone behind her had enough time to contemplate, initiate and complete an under taking manoeuvre.

All the while accelerating to what the op reckons was 180km/h.

It'd be some van to accelerate to 180 from whatever speed the op was doing in such a short distance as she is alleging.

Forget the numbers. People who tailgate will pull infornt of others as soon as they've the dimensions to without any regard as to checking it's being done safely. Just because they were able to accomplish it, does not mean the other driver was wrong not to.

Just this morning I saw someone undertake a truck. Then slide right into the next lane over without any chance to see what may have been coming from beside the truck.

But sure... if they could get in front no one should have been in that overtaking lane next to the truck...

dunleakelleher

bmwguy wrote: »

Fact - she said she was getting ready to merge back left but was undercut by someone's impatience immediately.

Getting ready, jazus wept whats needs to be done. a little bit of makeup, brush the hair, sent a couple of text, put the cat out...
come on how long does it take to put on the indicator, after all, she always intended to pull in as soon as she was clear.

I think we all know what went on here, just a little delay in doing anything to piss the car behind off.
yes, nothing illegal but definitely intentional

coffee_cake

siobhan08 wrote: »

If the other drivers had waited 5 seconds. I would have started to move over. Saw them going to the left lane to undertake when I was giving my left wing mirror a final check before commencing the land change

But if you were giving a final check why wasn't your indicator on?
It should be on to signal you're going to be making a move, it's no use to anyone to put it on while you're moving.
While the undertaking cars sound like dangerous numptys, it's important to remember you need to communicate with the other cars on the road. They've no other way of knowing what you're about or not about to do.
Do signal early on to say hey I'm about to pull over here give me a sec
It doesn't stop the crazy ones but it helps a lot

hawkwind23

some nonsense on this thread and weird justification of what could be considered attempted murder
I drive a couple of times a month on the M50 and its disgraceful , end of and as simple as that.
How there arent more deaths is pure luck.
Ive been driving for 30 years both private and commercial so ive enough time on the road to judge.

I have overtaken in the outer lane and witnessed what the OP has , come on ffs we all have and much worse!
Ive seen people swerve over two lanes and back over 3 at very high speed.
regular occurrence to have people right on my bumper , maybe inches at 140km , when ive a lorry on the right that i cant move over and i cant increase my speed because of a car in front.
Im an experienced driver and dont get too annoyed but im always glad to get onto the M1 , i imagine the aggressive attitude of these drivers must force the less experienced driver into a life threatening situation.

Its rush hour lads and lasses and a large city bypass with an excessive amount of metal doing high speeds , use a bit of cop on ffs

And serious , ive seen several moves this year alone that if there had been an accident i would of been pushing for manslaughter by dangerous and reckless driving

siobhan08

knucklehead6 wrote: »

FACT: She was in the overtaking lane long enough after completing an overtaking manoeuvre that someone behind her had enough time to contemplate, initiate and complete an under taking manoeuvre.

All the while accelerating to what the op reckons was 180km/h.

It'd be some van to accelerate to 180 from whatever speed the op was doing in such a short distance as she is alleging.

FACT - when I got past the last car in the line and intended to merge back to the left lane. When looking in the mirror I noticed the van moving to the left and I stayed in the overtaking lane long enough to complete his illegal manoeuvre.

At this point I was doing 150 to clear the traffic to my left as fast as possible to get said van off my arse so getting a van to approx 180 from 150 wouldn't be that unrealistic. Especially when it was a new van.

Those who think I was the issue are clearly those who think it is justified to tailgate and undercut. Simply because they perceived the driver in front of them to be too slow and have likely done it themselves to other divers.

Even saw it happen this morning. I was in the left lane jeep overtook me and was then undercut by a Mercedes who cut in in front of me

Dravokivich

bluewolf wrote: »

But if you were giving a final check why wasn't your indicator on?
It should be on to signal you're going to be making a move, it's no use to anyone to put it on while you're moving.
While the undertaking cars sound like dangerous numptys, it's important to remember you need to communicate with the other cars on the road. They've no other way of knowing what you're about or not about to do.
Do signal early on to say hey I'm about to pull over here give me a sec
It doesn't stop the crazy ones but it helps a lot

The OP did not expect this car to pull into that Lane. So chances are whenever they've checked prior to final check, they had no indication this person was going to be their either.

coffee_cake

Dravokivich wrote: »

The OP did not expect this car to pull into that Lane. So chances are whenever they've checked prior to final check, they had no indication this person was going to be their either.

They'd have to let whoever is in the driving lane know as well, whomever they'd just overtaken.

I mean I'm not justifying people being crazy on the roads here, don't get me wrong

antodeco

shar01 wrote: »

In a couple of hours time, I'm going to be joining the M50 at Cherrywood to head to the airport.

Any time when I'm on the M50 and the traffic is relatively light, I get into the left lane after Sandyford, stick the cruise control on at 100km and, except for having to move into the middle lane where there is merging traffic, I will spend most of the journey in the left hand lane. I guarantee you I will undertake many cars pootling along in the middle lane.

What I'm doing is illegal but as there's no enforcement... big swinging mickey!

Shush! Don't tell them the secret!

dr.fuzzenstein

dunleakelleher wrote: »

Getting ready, jazus wept whats needs to be done. a little bit of makeup, brush the hair, sent a couple of text, put the cat out...
come on how long does it take to put on the indicator, after all, she always intended to pull in as soon as she was clear.

I think we all know what went on here, just a little delay in doing anything to piss the car behind off.
yes, nothing illegal but definitely intentional

But it's the fault of the arsewanker behind who couldn't wait 5 fcuking seconds.

hawkwind23

I have sat in the outside lane because there is slow moving traffic to my left and it would cause a dangerous incident for me to move over and try squeeze into a small space and immediately brake to maintain a safe distance from the car in front.
I can see that if i clear the next car then there is ample space to then move over and not have to use my brakes or decelerate.
Thats standard and i fail to see why the tailgaters cant see that? I can see the whites of their angry and stressed out eyes they are so far up my hole so they can see this too

What some on here are justifying is doing some stunt trick where they put all road users at risk and pull of manoeuvrers that are reckless
What the reality is that the space they think was there has to be created by the ordinary drivers around these lunatics so they pull of their stunt and have put several cars at risk of an accident at high speeds.

robarmstrong

I had a really special case last night. I was turning onto the N3 (where you can go straight to Blanch centre, or right to the N3) and whilst the green arrow to turn right was on I had completed just about 80% of the turn, some absolute numpty tries to merge in front of me from the left for absolutely no reason other than to try be cheeky and get ahead of a few cars, even though they had broken a red light.

Naturally I flash the full beams and give them a beep (they unexpectedly broke a red light and almost caused a collision) only for them to brake extremely hard for some reason - not sure if they were brake checking me but they did it twice before throwing up the w*nker hand signal and getting whomever it was in the back of the car (171 Merc jeep) to take a picture of my reg plate presumably to report me to the police or shame me on social media despite them being absolute horrendous drivers. Literally makes no sense but it's the attitude of majority of drivers in this country, "f*ck you I'm not in the wrong you are".

People pulling into the third lane on the left also need to have a bit of cop on as people are merging from that side - allow the merge and come into the lane when it's safe to do so, to me it's common sense, allow the merge to keep the flow of traffic going rather than sitting in the lane causing mass traffic on a slip road..

lawred2

robarmstrong wrote: »

I had a really special case last night. I was turning onto the N3 (where you can go straight to Blanch centre, or right to the N3) and whilst the green arrow to turn right was on I had completed just about 80% of the turn, some absolute numpty tries to merge in front of me from the left for absolutely no reason other than to try be cheeky and get ahead of a few cars, even though they had broken a red light.

Naturally I flash the full beams and give them a beep (they unexpectedly broke a red light and almost caused a collision) only for them to brake extremely hard for some reason - not sure if they were brake checking me but they did it twice before throwing up the w*nker hand signal and getting whomever it was in the back of the car (171 Merc jeep) to take a picture of my reg plate presumably to report me to the police or shame me on social media despite them being absolute horrendous drivers. Literally makes no sense but it's the attitude of majority of drivers in this country, "f*ck you I'm not in the wrong you are".

People pulling into the third lane on the left also need to have a bit of cop on as people are merging from that side - allow the merge and come into the lane when it's safe to do so, to me it's common sense, allow the merge to keep the flow of traffic going rather than sitting in the lane causing mass traffic on a slip road..

you mean the left lane/inside lane?

Diemos

shar01 wrote: »

Any time when I'm on the M50 and the traffic is relatively light, I get into the left lane after Sandyford, stick the cruise control on at 100km and, except for having to move into the middle lane where there is merging traffic, I will spend most of the journey in the left hand lane. I guarantee you I will undertake many cars pootling along in the middle lane.

What I'm doing is illegal but as there's no enforcement... big swinging mickey!

What you are describing there is not undertaking, although you are passing on the near side of a vehicle. As a result it is not illegal, though more caution should be excerised, because you know, people are idiots.

CalamariFritti

This is for the impatient lads. Just a thought.

Which is not me condoning ignorance or lane hogging or anything like that. Just a disclaimer - which is probably futile - but I wanted to say it anyway.

I was commuting for 50 minutes each way for a number of years. And since commuting is sort of wasted time by nature commuting always means we try to get it over with as quickly as we can. We're always sort of in a hurry commuting. And it doesn't help if you commute like me on a cr@ppy road.

For year I was like an antichrist on that road. Right up behind the car in front of me. Always looking for opportunities to move on. Weaving, looking, putting the pressure on. Foot down at the earliest opportunity and on I go. I hated that drive. Never arrived in work rested and in good form.
And because it was such a frustrating experience - there will always be another car in front of you no matter how many cars you overtake - I decided to try something different.

So I timed my runs. 50 minutes average. And then I changed my attitude. For a whole week I just went with the flow. Left enough space, didn't care whether I was going 100 or 80 or whatever. Never pushed. Just went with the flow listening to the radio. Took it easy.
Turns out after a week when I did the averages again I spent 53 minutes on that road instead of 50.

Then I thought what am I doing to myself? This is ridiculous. And I changed my driving. And it helped. I still arrived at the same time but no stress. Used less petrol too.

I'm still an impatient driver thinking half the people around barely know what they're doing. Which is probably true. But I changed my attitude. I recognise situations where me driving the sh1t out of it will not change a thing only it will stress me out.

robarmstrong

lawred2 wrote: »

you mean the left lane/inside lane?

Yes, sorry probably should have explained a good bit better.

Tigger

siobhan08 wrote: »

FACT - when I got past the last car in the line and intended to merge back to the left lane. When looking in the mirror I noticed the van moving to the left and I stayed in the overtaking lane long enough to complete his illegal manoeuvre.

At this point I was doing 150 to clear the traffic to my left as fast as possible to get said van off my arse so getting a van to approx 180 from 150 wouldn't be that unrealistic. Especially when it was a new van.

Those who think I was the issue are clearly those who think it is justified to tailgate and undercut. Simply because they perceived the driver in front of them to be too slow and have likely done it themselves to other divers.

Even saw it happen this morning. I was in the left lane jeep overtook me and was then undercut by a Mercedes who cut in in front of me

what van does 180?
you were doing 150? you were accelerating up to 150kmph which is what 95 miles an hour and you were under taken by two vehicles??

is that what you are saying cos i'm incredulous

dudeeile

siobhan08 wrote: »

I was going a good bit over the speed limit and it still wasn't good enough for them.

When I was finished overtaking and intended to move over they didn't give me a chance and just flew up on my inside. Only saw them when I looked in my wing mirror to check the distance from the car I had just overtaken before starting to move over.

siobhan08 wrote: »

At this point I was doing 150 to clear the traffic to my left as fast as possible to get said van off my arse so getting a van to approx 180 from 150 wouldn't be that unrealistic. Especially when it was a new van.

Now I may be wrong but were you by any chance alternating your speed and making it a little bit more difficult for the drivers behind, I spend a lot of time travelling, both 4 wheels and 2 and most vehicles and by most I mean practically all, do not reach 150km/h especially during heavy commutes.

I'd also like to see the van that can hit 180km/h as quickly as you say, must have been Sabine driving.

Sam Kade

bluewolf wrote: »

They'd have to let whoever is in the driving lane know as well, whomever they'd just overtaken.

I mean I'm not justifying people being crazy on the roads here, don't get me wrong

You can't just cut in front of cars in the driving lane you need to go a certain distance ahead to go back in safely. Obviously in the op's case the impatient drivers behind did cut in front of cars in the driving lane.

Diemos

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

But it's the fault of the arsewanker behind who couldn't wait 5 fcuking seconds.

Agreed, the tailgater was 100% wrong. But it sounds like the OP could have done more to diffuse the situation, like indicate their intent to vacate the over taking lane in a timely manner. Speeding up to 150kmh because you are intimidated by the car behind you is not the action of a competant driver.

If the van had time to cut up the car in the left hand lane and the OP had not even begun indicating then it think it's fair to say that more could have been done.
That is in no means to validate the action of the van driver, they are a dangerous a$$.

All of this talk of brake testing and other actions to piss off an a$$hat behind you just drops to their level. There are no winners in these pi$$ing contests.

Diemos

Sam Kade wrote: »

You can't just cut in front of cars in the driving lane you need to go a certain distance ahead to go back in safely. Obviously in the op's case the impatient drivers behind did cut in front of cars in the driving lane.

There is a difference between indicating your intent to make a manouver and actually completing said manouver.

siobhan08

Tigger wrote: »

what van does 180?
you were doing 150? you were accelerating up to 150kmph which is what 95 miles an hour and you were under taken by two vehicles??

is that what you are saying cos i'm incredulous

Yes that's exactly what happen. I was doing that speed to get by the line of traffic as fast as possible to get the Ahole in the van off my arse as quickly as possible. 180 was a rough estimate going by my speed of 150 and how quickly he dusted me on the inside and the other vechicles ahead. He was so far into the distance that he was totally gone from my sight within a about 3 minutes.

I never usually go so fast but was very conscious of the moron so close to me that I wanted to clear the traffic as fast possible to enable me to get out of his way. Which he didn't even give me the opportunity to do so because he cut in as soon as there was any type of large gap into the left lane.

That fact that I was going that speed and was tailgated and undertaken is what I found so astonishing. Like what speed is fast enough for those idiots ??

Zubeneschamali

Diemos wrote: »

What you are describing there is not undertaking, although you are passing on the near side of a vehicle. As a result it is not illegal, though more caution should be excerised, because you know, people are idiots.

It is illegal. There is no legal definition of "undertaking", but you may only pass on the left in 3 situations, and slow numpty in the middle lane is not one of them.

Sam Kade

Diemos wrote: »

There is a difference between indicating your intent to make a manouver and actually completing said manouver.

Like I said before tailgaters can't see indicators.

dudeeile

Sam Kade wrote: »

Like I said before tailgaters can't see indicators.

Hard to see someting that wasn't there.

Dravokivich

dudeeile wrote: »

Hard to see someting that wasn't there.

Cut the nit picking. The OP didn't come here to expect a pat on the back, or to have their driving glorified. They wanted to understand if madness is expected on the M50.

lawred2

Sam Kade wrote: »

Like I said before tailgaters can't see indicators.

?

The Bishop Basher

This story doesn't add up..

You were intending to move left but not indicating, you needed 5 seconds to think about indicating, another 5 seconds to think about the manoeuvre while being undertaken by a van doing 180 while overtaking other traffic..

Don't know who is wrong or who is right as I wasn't there but if I was a judge, based on the facts presented, and given the prevalence of this behaviour on our roads, I'd say you were hogging the lane.

Also by your own admission you were driving faster then you were comfortable with and breaking the limit. I wouldn't be that fussed about the limit as many of us exceed it on motorways from time to time but driving faster then you're comfortable with is nothing short of lethal.

dudeeile

Dravokivich wrote: »

Cut the nit picking. The OP didn't come here to expect a pat on the back, or to have their driving glorified. They wanted to understand if madness is expected on the M50.

Just trying to get a better understanding of the actual facts, or nit picking as you call it, I'm unsure why the op came here.