Exceeding the speed limit whilst overtaking

EireRoadUser · 28-03-2006 10:30PM

I understand it's not legal to speed ,but in order to keep the safety of the road I was on ,it is duty on me to overtake and keep things moving.

maidhc · 28-03-2006 11:19PM

This is going very OT. I am aware exceeding a relevant speed limit is an offence, but it is silly in a very pythonesque way to hold up complying with the limits as some sort of magic way to avoid having a crash.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

Put simple? the wind is blocked by the larger vehicle and when that wind is re-introduced it can cause to swerve. Also add that the larger vehicle is now in your slipstream. As for blow outs, overtaking no but the higher the speed the more dangerous the blow out.

Thanks for the physics lesson. However you should note that you should not be that close to a large vehicle at 60mph. Blowouts do happen, but thankfullyn they are an extremely rare occurance can be minimised by proper maintenance and fitting the correct tyres.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

So now your nervous when performing this operation? The more you speak the more I urge you not too overtake at speed however please note you would still be on the right (left) side of the road if overtaking on a motorway so there would be no need to break the 120kmh limit.

We drive on the left in this county and I dont recommend passing an artic with a relative speed of 5mph. The comment re motorways is silly.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

The original post asks if the speed limit applies when overtaking. the response is if the car you overtake is doing the limit why overtake? Your counter has no basis. In your scenario you say your doing 60 or 70 overtaking a car doing 50, but whats the speed limit in this scenario? Is it 60? then why overtake doing 70?????

We have established the speed limit applies when overtaking, but it often is safer to overtake at 70. Do you suggest if a vehicle is doing 57 mph you should pass at +3 (slow walking) speed?

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

And? So do a lot of little boy racers until they go head first into an oncoming car or get a blow out or encounter wind after overtaking. In fact most people have no penalty points because they slow down for the cameras and guns not because they dont speed or drive dangerously.

I am also glad to say my car is a bog standard Ford Focus Diesel, nothing too fancy. It is impossible slow down for a speed camera since the Gardaí tend to locate themselves so such cannot occur.

I get the impression you havn't done much driving youself, but the most dangerous places tend not to be main roads, but secondary roads with bad bends, humps and hollows.

Turner · 28-03-2006 11:39PM

maidhc wrote:

most dangerous places tend not to be main roads, but secondary roads with bad bends, humps and hollows.

Which mostly are in low garda populated districts. Likes of the n4 n7 n11 all have regional traffic corps in their area's

At any one time only about 24-30 gardai might be working in some countys !!! With a third taken up oh station duties

Eru · 29-03-2006 12:08AM

maidhc wrote:

This is going very OT. I am aware exceeding a relevant speed limit is an offence, but it is silly in a very pythonesque way to hold up complying with the limits as some sort of magic way to avoid having a crash.

So it doesnt reduce road deaths at all? Speed makes no difference?

maidhc wrote:

Thanks for the physics lesson. However you should note that you should not be that close to a large vehicle at 60mph. Blowouts do happen, but thankfullyn they are an extremely rare occurance can be minimised by proper maintenance and fitting the correct tyres..

You are the one thats speaking about overtaking a large vehicle not I.

maidhc wrote:

We drive on the left in this county and I dont recommend passing an artic with a relative speed of 5mph. The comment re motorways is silly.

Again, you brought up artics and motorways.

maidhc wrote:

I am also glad to say my car is a bog standard Ford Focus Diesel, nothing too fancy. It is impossible slow down for a speed camera since the Gardaí tend to locate themselves so such cannot occur.

speed cameras are fixed however everyone knows that they only catch you if you go past the white lines over the speed limit. Your either blind or have no brakes if you cannot slow down in time. The Gatso is the hand held device.

maidhc wrote:

since the Gardaí tend to locate themselves so such cannot occur.

And you believe that I should stand on a small road, on a bend in bad weather holding a gatso gun waiting for someone, like you, to come tearing around said corner at high speed? My uniform has 'Garda' not a large 'S' on it. "Well Chief, you will be glad to know we caught a speeder. Sadly we lost 6 men out there but we got her in the end".

maidhc wrote:

I get the impression you havn't done much driving youself, but the most dangerous places tend not to be main roads, but secondary roads with bad bends, humps and hollows.

hmmm, Im not debating who has the biggest car or the cleanest license however I was aware of the effects speed has on cars such as increased wind resistence, something you didnt realise even existed.

EireRoadUser · 29-03-2006 12:09AM

My little example was just an example ,something that happens to all drivers at some stage.

Don't expect your vehicle to take care of you if you don't take care of yourself.

Eru · 29-03-2006 12:12AM

EireRoadUser wrote:

I understand it's not legal to speed ,but in order to keep the safety of the road I was on ,it is duty on me to overtake and keep things moving.

Im not condeming you, were all human and those slow gits who wont even look in their mirror and pull over are very annoying. I was merely stating that theres no lawful reason for speeding.

Thats just a legal view not a moral one.

Turner · 29-03-2006 12:13AM

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

And you believe that I should stand on a small road, on a bend in bad weather holding a gatso gun waiting for someone, like you, to come tearing around said corner at high speed? My uniform has 'Garda' not a large 'S' on it. "Well Chief, you will be glad to know we caught a speeder. Sadly we lost 6 men out there but we got her in the end".

Trying to detect, stop and in some cases persue cars on "back roads" is extremely dangerous.

Maybe if non intercept detections were increased in these area. Where Gardai did not have to pull over the dirver.

But then again how do you position a Gatso van on a narrow coutry backroad and where do you get the garda to man it in such lowly populated garda areas.

Eru · 29-03-2006 12:18AM

Heres a better question, how do you get people to take soem bloody personal responsibility and stop blaming the Gardai for car accidents.

maidhc · 29-03-2006 12:25AM

hummmm...

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

So it doesnt reduce road deaths at all? Speed makes no difference?

I have never seen a stopped car crash. I suspect stupidity and general arrogance causes more accidents.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

The Gatso is the hand held device.

http://www.gatsometer.com/index.php?p=5496

Umm, no. Gatso might make handheld cameras now, but are famous for the big stationary ones. we have three cameras in the country with white lines. You will normally be caught by the time you spot a mobile speed trap. If you are a guard you know this.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

And you believe that I should stand on a small road, on a bend in bad weather holding a gatso gun waiting for someone, like you, to come tearing around said corner at high speed?

You make a lot of assumptions about my driving, all of which are wrong and a bit insulting. I would like to see Gardaí do that general thing though, would certainly beat leaning up against a tree on a sunday evening in a 50k zone that shouldnt be!

EireRoadUser · 29-03-2006 12:34AM

Thats a great idea ,mean speed.

One device i think is a great deterrent is the sign that reads out your speed.
No matter when i pass it ,I always see people slowing down when there speed is up in lights. It must take the privacy out of the driver or something and they automatically feel guilty.

Also I noticed lately there is yellow lines now painted on certain roads at bends etc, another great idea the thick yellow paint makes you want to slow down.

There are many ways to help drivers drive safer ,without brute garda force.
In spain when road works are been carried out the road's paint markings change to yellow well before hand so you know to slow down.

I''ve always thought different colour roadmarking subconciously help drivers.

SouperComputer · 29-03-2006 12:42AM

by Karlitosway1978 wrote:

Going around a large vehicle would cause wind resistance, blow outs, etc

If you experience a "slipstream effect" worth talking about @ 100Km\h you are already too close to the vehice in front, or perhaps driving a vehicle with the aerodynamic footprint of a house!! The lateral instability occurs if you drive to closey to the side of the vehicle while you are overtaking, as the two streams of disturbed air meet. This also leads to extra drag. These are two separate occurances.

Blowouts are reasonably rare in passenger vehicles and severe accidents as a result of them even more scarce.

The assumption that a blowout is more dangerous at a higher speed is incorrect. One reason for this is that the failed corner on the car has less time to occillate, which is one of the main reasons for loss of control. Of course as you slow down things get more interesting, but you have a bit more warning at that stage. I accept however that if you take an extreme example of speed that the instability may cause a spin, but only of one overreacts by thumping on the anchors or other violent attempts to "control" the car.

Speed makes no difference?

As I have stated in other threads, speed is only one factor of many. However it is the easiest to quantify, so its an easy target.

Im too lazy to retype, so ill C&P:

soupercomputer wrote:

The state of awareness of the driver
Visibility.
Field of vision.
Available traction\vehicle condition
Proximity to hazards such as junctions and pedestrians.
Availability of surfaces to take evasive action.

These are some of the main contributing factors of accidents. Speeding does not enter the equation, inappropiate use of speed however does. Again two very different things.

Back OT, assuming you have picked a "safe" spot to overtake a long vehicle in a reasonable period of time it may be required to exceed the legal speed limit. I would rather overtake said vehicle and pull back into my lane leaving a good distance between myself and the vehicle I have overtaken, than concern myself with breaking the law.

Yes it is breaking the law. TBH I put mine and my passenger's safety first and the law second.

Eru · 29-03-2006 12:54AM

maidhc wrote:

I have never seen a stopped car crash.

Exactly my point. Your confusing who is arguing in defence of speeding, its you.

maidhc wrote:

Umm, no. Gatso might make handheld cameras now, but are famous for the big stationary ones. we have three cameras in the country with white lines. You will normally be caught by the time you spot a mobile speed trap. If you are a guard you know this.

NO, the Gatso is the hand held radar that Gardai use. When you see the Gardai at the side of the road pointing a device at you its not a machine gun, its a Gatso radar gun. Theres more than 3 cameras but not all are working. Big difference. Just because people call all things related to detecting speeding 'gatsos' doesnt make it so but is there really a point in this?

maidhc wrote:

You make a lot of assumptions about my driving, all of which are wrong and a bit insulting. I would like to see Gardaí do that general thing though, would certainly beat leaning up against a tree on a sunday evening in a 50k zone that shouldnt be!

well thats because you cant distinguish between reality and fiction or your incapable of realising that the world doesnt do what you want simple because you wish it.

Again for you (because everyone else seems to understand) IT. IS. SUICIDAL. TO. STAND. IN. THE. MIDDLE. OF. THE. ROAD. IN. DARK. WET. CONDITIONS. ON. A. BLIND. CORNER. UNLESS. YOU. ARE. SUPERMAN.

And it would really help if people grew up and didnt blame the Gardai when they crash their car because they were speeding. At no point was I or any other Garda maing you speed or effectign the conditions.

maidhc · 29-03-2006 08:57AM

I give up. You dont want to listen. This is my last post on the matter.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

Exactly my point.

Because a stopped car cannot crash does not means speeding is the cause of all accidents. Refer to SouperComputer above for a fuller explaination.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

NO, the Gatso is the hand held radar that Gardai use. When you see the Gardai at the side of the road pointing a device at you its not a machine gun, its a Gatso radar gun. Theres more than 3 cameras but not all are working. Big difference. Just because people call all things related to detecting speeding 'gatsos' doesnt make it so but is there really a point in this?

If you clicked the link above you would see all the speed metering equipment that Gatsometer BV make. I cant see a handheld gun, but strangely enough everything required to kit out a van and a stationary camera is there.

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

Again for you (because everyone else seems to understand) IT. IS. SUICIDAL. TO. STAND. IN. THE. MIDDLE. OF. THE. ROAD. IN. DARK. WET. CONDITIONS. ON. A. BLIND. CORNER. UNLESS. YOU. ARE. SUPERMAN.

Then dont do it. Pick a safe place to stand, and dont stand in the middle of the road. There is no need as the cameras are calibrated to take account of the offset.

Eru · 29-03-2006 12:26PM

maidhc wrote:

I give up. You dont want to listen. This is my last post on the matter.

Because a stopped car cannot crash does not means speeding is the cause of all accidents. Refer to SouperComputer above for a fuller explaination.

If you clicked the link above you would see all the speed metering equipment that Gatsometer BV make. I cant see a handheld gun, but strangely enough everything required to kit out a van and a stationary camera is there.

Then dont do it. Pick a safe place to stand, and dont stand in the middle of the road. There is no need as the cameras are calibrated to take account of the offset.

1. Good you make no sense anyway.

2. never blamed speed for all accidents, I said it contributes, again you are the one arguing over speed and safety.

3. I dont need a commercial site, I can walk into a store room and see them or for the likes of yourself do a Google Ireland search.

4. Like on a straight wide road such as the N7 or a Motorway? You are the one calling for Gardai to be where most accidents happen which would kill Gardai not save drivers.

Victor · 30-03-2006 03:56PM

maidhc wrote:

You make a lot of assumptions about my driving, all of which are wrong and a bit insulting. I would like to see Gardaí do that general thing though, would certainly beat leaning up against a tree on a sunday evening in a 50k zone that shouldnt be!

50 km/h zones tend to have pedestrians in them. Some people forget to adjust their speed from country to town.

maidhc wrote:

Because a stopped car cannot crash does not means speeding is the cause of all accidents.

Speed has a direct relationship with severity of accidents, with severity believed to be proportional to somewhere between the speed cubed and speed to the power of 4.

Speed has a linear proportion to the likelyhood of certain accidents.

maidhc · 30-03-2006 05:15PM

Victor wrote:

Speed has a linear proportion to the likelyhood of certain accidents.

It does all things being equal. I'm sure you will accept 120kmph on a motorway is inherently safer than 20kmph on a bad hairpin bend.

The speed "mantra" I feel is doing road safety an injustice. I was in a car recently with a cousin on a country road. He was doing 80kmph, and that was the limit. I told him he was driving too fast for the road (I know the road in question backwards, and it has some nasty blind spots), but he his answer was that it is fine, as it is the speed limit. I have come across this attitude from numerous people.

Prosecuting people for doing 110kmph on a 100kmph dual carriageway does nothing only reinforce this idea about the law being in some way infallible and that HIGH speeds as distinct from UNSUITABLE speeds are the real culprit.

What I would love to see is more of those "SLOW" and "VERY SLOW" signs before bends where suitable as well as a sign indicating the angle of the bend. I do think it would help people moderate their speed (which might be below the limit to begin with.... before Karlito or someone jumps down my throat) before they hit a bad corner.

Sparks · 30-03-2006 05:42PM

If we're going to get those "SLOW" signs before bends, could we also get a sign for slip roads that read "SPEED UP YOU IDIOT, WE'RE MERGING WITH FAST-MOVING TRAFFIC NOW"?

Victor · 30-03-2006 05:43PM

maidhc wrote:

It does all things being equal. I'm sure you will accept 120kmph on a motorway is inherently safer than 20kmph on a bad hairpin bend.

All things being equal a motorway tends not to have bad hairpin bends. Apples and gadflys.

I told him he was driving too fast for the road (I know the road in question backwards, and it has some nasty blind spots), but he his answer was that it is fine, as it is the speed limit.

Then smack him and tell him its a limit, not a target.

Prosecuting people for doing 110kmph on a 100kmph dual carriageway does nothing only reinforce this idea about the law being in some way infallible and that HIGH speeds as distinct from UNSUITABLE speeds are the real culprit.

Every infraction should be punished (within the norms of the law). The vast majority of detections are on single-carriageway roads. People only think they happen on motorways, because they are the ones people see.

What I would love to see is more of those "SLOW" and "VERY SLOW" signs before bends where suitable as well as a sign indicating the angle of the bend.

How about "SLOW" and "VERY SLOW" and "REALLY F**KING STUPID"

maidhc · 30-03-2006 07:07PM

Victor wrote:

Every infraction should be punished (within the norms of the law).

Obviously that is impossible, but also probably undesirable since the only way you can get close to that is through a textbook application of totalitarianism. Social orders where such enforcement has been applied normally have not lasted very long. Even in the middle ages when stealing a loaf of bread was punishable by death there had to be many pardons and exceptions in place to prevent peasant revolts!

Untimately cars move, and are controlled by fallible human beings. They will crash while those two conditions remain. Apparently the rate of road deaths is lower now than it was in 1972, despite the massive increase in traffic, so I dont think there is any need to get too excited.

Sparks wrote:

"SPEED UP YOU IDIOT, WE'RE MERGING WITH FAST-MOVING TRAFFIC NOW"

No, in the new politically correct world of gay byrne motoring those drivers are to be aspired to.

Eru · 30-03-2006 07:37PM

EireRoadUser wrote:

One device i think is a great deterrent is the sign that reads out your speed.
No matter when i pass it ,I always see people slowing down when there speed is up in lights.

Sorry I didnt reply sooner. I agree, this device has a big psychological effect as does the speed lines you run across from time to time.

Both always make me do a double check of the speed and slow down more.

Sparks · 30-03-2006 07:55PM

maidhc wrote:

No, in the new politically correct world of gay byrne motoring those drivers are to be aspired to.

Maybe it's my own personal bugbear, but I don't see why it's not an offence to try to merge with 120kph traffic on the M50 from a slip road while doing 30kph yourself. Not only do you risk an accident with your own car, but with the others on the slip road behind you, not to mention those on the M50 itself. It's just unsafe driving.

TheNog · 30-03-2006 11:20PM

Sparks wrote:

Maybe it's my own personal bugbear, but I don't see why it's not an offence to try to merge with 120kph traffic on the M50 from a slip road while doing 30kph yourself. Not only do you risk an accident with your own car, but with the others on the slip road behind you, not to mention those on the M50 itself. It's just unsafe driving.

In France it is an offence to join a 120kph motorway at anything less than 100kph which makes sense to me. You should not even attempt to join into traffic that is travelling two/three times faster than you even though you see it everyday on motorways and national roads. The merging lanes are there for a reason not decoration.

Mrs. MacGyver · 03-10-2007 07:43PM

Trojan911 wrote:

Cheers all,

I would have to go with the fact that exceeding the speed limit would constitute an offence under the RTA.

I have spoken to various Garda sources, including traffic corps and all have said "They think you can but can't find legislation / proven cases to back it up", nobody seems to know. I guess it is yet to be challenged in the courts....

TJ911...

If you are looking for legislation try www.irishstatutebook.ie

pirelli · 07-10-2007 07:00AM

Sangre wrote:

The only reason you'd need to go over the speed limit when overtaking someone is when the car ahead is doing the speed limit. So why do you have to overtake them then? Thats probably how a court will look at it.

The rules of the road state that you do not exceed the speed limit when overtaking. Got your point

However it is legal to over take a vehicle that is not traveling a the max speed limit.The rules of the road state the vehicle overtaking must accelerate and overtake with the minimum of delay. The roadcraft will also state's the same to overtake nimbly.

So when overtaking execute the overtake safely and effectivly with the minimum of delay and that will mean slighlty infringing on the speed limit when overtaking a slower moving vehicle at near speed limit speed's.

I know that a garda would say only overtake when it is safe to do so and this means when you dont have to break the speed limit in executing that overtake. I however believe that if i do infringe on the speed limit that i have not commited an offence when overtaking because the slower car sped up slightly when I was overtaking and i was forced to complete the overtake with the minimum of delay.
The Garda would say well you have to drive defensively and anticipate these thing's happening and predict the other drivers behaviour and so u would have to counter that into judging whether you could execute a safe overtake.

I would say "so Garda your telling me to be defensive and think defensively" and you wonder why we argue all day.

Lets say
Billy Shouted at Tom and started arguing with him and Tom exclaimed and disagreed back in defense, would Billy be able to say Tom was a defensive person and was just as responsible for all the aggro.Tom says that Billy is aggressive. Who should be found wrong at a harrassment hearing.

Exceeding the speed limit whilst overtaking

Comments