Ghost island at junctions

zepman

Hi there,

I was out practising this afternoon accompanied by a mate and came across a situation that I'm a bit confused about.

Referring to the picture of the road below, I was at point A because there were parked cars on my side. I had to take a right turn at the junction ahead, and there was a ghost island just before the right-turn lane emerged.



The picture below shows how I dealt with it. After I was beyond the last parked car on my side, I moved from point A to B and then to C (making the necessary observations and signalling right). I did this because the boundary of the ghost island on my side was a continuous white line.



However, my mate said that I shouldn't have moved over to point B, and should have driven straight to point C by going over the ghost island. This is what I saw the car in front of me doing as well.

What is the right way of dealing with this situation?

MascotDec85

You are right. Your mate is wrong.

MascotDec85

Slightly more detailed reply. Firstly, you did the right thing, so well done!
Basically treat the ghost island exactly the way you would if it was concrete. The principle of the continuous white line is the correct way to think about it.
Often, to help the flow of traffic, drivers will often sit in the hatched area. This isn’t technically correct though and would normally result in you getting marked on test for not complying with road markings.

Wishbone Ash

MascotDec85 wrote: »

....Often, to help the flow of traffic, drivers will often sit in the hatched area. This isn’t technically correct though and would normally result in you getting marked on test for not complying with road markings.

I've often wondered about that.

There's a junction that I use regularly where, at busy times, there are long tailbacks waiting to turn right. I have never seen any driver not enter the hatched marking area as, to not do so would impede the flow of traffic going straight ahead. If I were to obey the rules, I'd be left lurking in the 'straight ahead' lane, sticking out like a sore thumb, while traffic would continue to form a queue to my right and for a distance behind me on my right (as well as the traffic building up behind me in the 'straight ahead' lane).

A few times I've 'experimented' by not entered the hatched marking area but was quickly blown out of it by motorists wishing to go straight ahead.

It's not on a test route but, if a similar situation occurred in a test, would the examiner take the situation into account?

MascotDec85

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I've often wondered about that.

There's a junction that I use regularly where, at busy times, there are long tailbacks waiting to turn right. I have never seen any driver not enter the hatched marking area as, to not do so would impede the flow of traffic going straight ahead. If I were to obey the rules, I'd be left lurking in the 'straight ahead' lane, sticking out like a sore thumb, while traffic would continue to form a queue to my right and for a distance behind me on my right (as well as the traffic building up behind me in the 'straight ahead' lane).

A few times I've 'experimented' by not entered the hatched marking area but was quickly blown out of it by motorists wishing to go straight ahead.

It's not on a test route but, if a similar situation occurred in a test, would the examiner take the situation into account?

If an area like that was on a test route I’d advise to seek direction from the tester. Basically say, “I know I shouldn’t enter the hatched area but if I do I’ll allow the traffic going straight to keep going.”
The vast majority of testers will help them in a situation like that.

Alanstrainor

Actually, during my test the examiner stepped in to advise me to move into the hatched markings in a scenario just as above. He said something along the lines of "Other drivers will start to do silly things otherwise". I followed his instruction obviously, and shortly I was back at the test centre where I passed. He made further comment back at the centre, but I don't recall what he said then.

Isambard

yeah, in normal driving you'd do as your mate said, but in a test, you'd be well advised not to.

zepman

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Actually, during my test the examiner stepped in to advise me to move into the hatched markings in a scenario just as above. He said something along the lines of "Other drivers will start to do silly things otherwise". I followed his instruction obviously, and shortly I was back at the test centre where I passed. He made further comment back at the centre, but I don't recall what he said then.

My mate said something similar - that the vehicle immediately behind me which might also be turning right might go straight over the hatched markings into the right-turn lane, so doing what I did could actually be risky.

When I did my test, I did one or two things 'wrong', but that made sense at the time. When I did it, I explained beforehand that i was about to do something that was 'wrong', but explained my reasoning. I never got marked down.


For example, slightly different to the OP, I was on a main road, and there was a car leaving a petrol station. No one was letting him out, and he was there for ages. I explained that I felt if I was driving in normal circumstances it would be fair and reasonable to allow that car a chance to get out. I was in a queue of traffic at traffic lights, And when the cars in front of me moved off, I stayed put, to allow the petrol station car to get out.

I wasn't marked down for it (could be seen as an error in 'right of way' or 'making progress' I presume) but the tester remarked it was courteous driving.


Another example was when I went around the roundabout the wrong way, as there was a build up of traffic on it before my exit. Explained that I didnt want to waste both my time and the testers, so by quickly accelerating around the roundabout into oncoming traffic and taking my exit, i saved us both time.


(I might have just made the second example up.. but the first one did happen.. )

Wishbone Ash

Deleted User wrote: »

....I wasn't marked down for it (could be seen as an error in 'right of way' or 'making progress' I presume) but the tester remarked it was courteous driving....

I'm not sure how it works since they brought in the new marking system a good few years ago but the way it used to work was that you weren't penalised if you simply stopped to allow another vehicle to enter the road but you were penalised if you gestured to them to enter.

If you gestured to a pedestrian to cross the road, it was an automatic failure. It happened a friend of mine doing the 'artic' test in Finglas years ago. He stopped the truck and gestured to a girl pushing a buggy to cross the road and that was that.

Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I'm not sure how it works since they brought in the new marking system a good few years ago

I think I was on the new marking system (the tester was using a tablet, rather than pen/paper).


That said, as per your own post, I didn't flash lights or wave like a madman. I just kinda nodded to the other driver and he went for it.


I had also got a supervisor in the car with me during my test (aswell as the tester himself) so I presume in my case, common sense prevailed.

MascotDec85

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I'm not sure how it works since they brought in the new marking system a good few years ago but the way it used to work was that you weren't penalised if you simply stopped to allow another vehicle to enter the road but you were penalised if you gestured to them to enter.

If you gestured to a pedestrian to cross the road, it was an automatic failure. It happened a friend of mine doing the 'artic' test in Finglas years ago. He stopped the truck and gestured to a girl pushing a buggy to cross the road and that was that.

I’m unsure when this “new” marking system started. I’m an instructor almost 9 years and apart from the apparatus used to mark, it hasn’t changed.
Whilst a Grade 3 fault is open to a tester for “do not beckon others” I’m struggling to think of a scenario where it would be applied rather than a Grade 3.

Never trust anyone gesturing you. Let them assist you but always fully satisfy yourself that it’s safe to move

Wishbone Ash

MascotDec85 wrote: »

I’m unsure when this “new” marking system started. I’m an instructor almost 9 years and apart from the apparatus used to mark, it hasn’t changed

I was referring to the system that existed before the Grade system came in. I'm not sure how long ago but probably 20 years or more. I did most categories under the old system.

MascotDec85 wrote:

.....Whilst a Grade 3 fault is open to a tester for “do not beckon others” I’m struggling to think of a scenario where it would be applied....

I think it was used when a truck driver gestured to a pedestrian to do something which would put them in danger - i.e. stopping to allow someone to cross the road. Particularly dangerous in a truck as a following driver may think that the truck is stopping anyway and make an overtaking manoeuvre. Further complicated by the fact that the pedestrian can't see over/behind the truck when crossing.

Posy

There's a difference between letting a car that's waiting pull out in front of you, and beckoning a pedestrian across the road though, no? I'd have thought the former was just being courteous.

Dravokivich

Posy wrote: »

There's a difference between letting a car that's waiting pull out in front of you, and beckoning a pedestrian across the road though, no? I'd have thought the former was just being courteous.

Don't drive for kudos. If a pedestrian finds their way on the road, it's better to give them the opportunity to get off. If only for it draws down the chances of them jumping into you and claiming you ran them over. You need to be cynical of others intentions when driving.