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
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
How to Use A Roundabout
Options
Comments
-
So to sum up, you have a system that you feel is simpler than the rules of the road and even though it contradicts the ROTR you will use it..
So, with that in mind, the simplest system would be for everyone to stay in the left hand lane.. There would be absolutely no possibility of anyone getting cut up.. Correct?
Would you consider it acceptable for me to drive by this rule (as some people do), and take an exit right around the rounadabout (5pm by some methods.. u turn if you will) in the left lane?
It directly contravenes the rotr, but it everyone did it, then it would be safer....
Do you get my point? People cannot and should not come up with their own interpretation of the rules.. A single method does need to exist, and it should exist with the ROTR.. there was confusion previously with was cleared up by the removal of 1/2/3rd exit naming convention.. Those web sites need to be updated to reflect the clarification of the rules, not by people choosing to implement a system with contravenes the rotr..
You inadvertently touch on an important point there.
Roundabout design is a major factor. If vehicles entering a roundabout were constrained to only one lane or clearly defined path, then there would be little chance of conflict.
In Ireland unfortunately, roundabouts are designed with little regard for safety and ease of use. Engineers want to maximise traffic flow, "planners" want to bung in as many exits as they can get away with to please the developers, and bean counters just want to save money. I am told that the RSA "have raised this issue with the NRA about the uniformity and construction standards for roundabouts". I wish them luck.
We need to learn from the Dutch. I wonder what their RoTR and driver training are like?
0 -
-
-
Iwannahurl wrote: »You inadvertently touch on an important point there.
Well not inadvertantly..
Let me explain further..
I dont disagree with PaddytheNth (sp?) that there needs to be single ruleset.. I think we all agree, where we disagree is that I say one already exists (the ROTR), Paddy and others seem to believe their method is better and therefore should be used.. I believe the ROTR is the baseline which should be used, and amended if necessary (as has been done)..
Here is a case in point.. This is a roundabout that I use every day.. (and for frame of reference.. the following roundabout at Kilcock/m4 is a disaster with the bulk of cars taking the 2pm exit/3rd exit from the left lane with no indicators coming from Leixlip side)...
When taking the following roundabout coming from the south and heading east, which entrance lane would you use? (there are 2 - left and right)
Everyone gets in the right hand lane.. as per the ROTR great.. it also matches rules which say right for right hand.. but those who insist on second exit would be in the left lane..
Can anyone explain why noone is ever in the left lane? and how the right lane would ever be used in this roundabout if that second exit rule was meant to exist?0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Zubeneschamali wrote: »Yes, my Tom Tom says that all the time.
"At the roundabout, go straight, 3rd exit"
That would do my head in. You should have bought a Garmin
0 -
So to sum up, you have a system that you feel is simpler than the rules of the road and even though it contradicts the ROTR you will use it..
That's not really what I'm saying, but it's close.So, with that in mind, the simplest system would be for everyone to stay in the left hand lane.. There would be absolutely no possibility of anyone getting cut up.. Correct?
No, that's incorrect. This could be where the problem lies.
I've gotten grief non stop in here and asked several times to explain the rules and so on and you could be misunderstanding the sequential method.
Sequential = only use left lane for first 2 exits, then use the right for the remaining.
So, no, to answer your question, I don't think it'd be easier to only use the left lane....
Would you consider it acceptable for me to drive by this rule (as some people do), and take an exit right around the rounadabout (5pm by some methods.. u turn if you will) in the left lane?
No of course not. Again, you're showing you don't understand the other method which is why you and some others are getting so irate about how you're liable to be killed at any moment on a roundabout if the 'rest of us' are using this method.
If you're exiting at a 5pm exit, the likelihood is that there are more than 2 exits before that, so you would be in the right lane. You didn't state the number of exits in your question though so it's a moot point.It directly contravenes the rotr, but it everyone did it, then it would be safer....
What you 'think' is the sequential method sounds absolutely insane so I hope to god nobody is using it.Do you get my point? People cannot and should not come up with their own interpretation of the rules
That goes without saying. The problem with any rule or guide is that is has to be 100% conclusive and not open to interpretation. The RSA has failed spectacularily here.A single method does need to exist, and it should exist with the ROTR.. there was confusion previously with was cleared up by the removal of 1/2/3rd exit naming convention.. Those web sites need to be updated to reflect the clarification of the rules, not by people choosing to implement a system with contravenes the rotr..
Probably the only thing we'll agree on. 0 -
But then, go back to my picture the Enfield roundabout..
Coming from the South and going West, you would join in the left lane and go all of the way around the roundabout in the left? (and this is not hypothetical, I do this route most days)
I should add, the off exit (west) has 1 lane... 0 -
That goes without saying. The problem with any rule or guide is that is has to be 100% conclusive and not open to interpretation. The RSA has failed spectacularily here.
But thats part of the issue They realised that the previous naming conventions were giving rise to misinterpretation, so since 2006 that convention was dropped and a new version implemented.. The new version is crystal clear if you don't try and merge it with the old (sequential) version..
Noone on here picks left, unless they try and base it upon the sequential rule, which references to were removed in 2006 for precisely that reason.
I do believe they should be clearer in stating that the sequential can and does cause issues, as in the Enfield roundabout (becuase this is the current issue facing drivers in reality.. old vs new interpretations).. but I believe it's somewhat unfair to blame the RSA when Driving Instructors post 2006 seem to be the only ones referring to lane choice on a strictly sequential numbering method.
The new system is simple.. any exits up to and including directly ahead.. left lane.. all exits past that.. right lane.. (and for clarity it's not a new system, its the same old system being described in a new manner)
Edit - (Late Edit) something just occured to me.. In reference to the Enfield rounabout and what driving schools teach.. Lets use one of the links the iwannahurl presented before..
http://www.lireland.com/theory/roundabouts.htm
• Treat the roundabout as a normal junction which means you yield right of way to traffic approaching on the roundabout.
• IF LEAVING BY THE FIRST EXIT approach and enter the roundabout in the left-hand lane signalling a left turn and proceed to leave the roundabout at that exit.
• IF LEAVING BY THE SECOND EXIT approach and enter the roundabout in the left-hand lane but do not signal until you have passed the first exit, then signal a left turn and leave at the next exit.
• IF LEAVING BY ANY SUBSEQUENT EXIT approach and enter the roundabout in the right hand lane signalling a right turn. Keep in the right hand lane (i.e. the lane next to the centre). As you pass the exit before the one you intend to leave by, signal a left turn and, when your way is clear, move to the other lane and leave at the desired exit.
Remember that signals are merely indications of intent. They do not confer right of way. When in doubt, play safe - YIELD.
MAKING A LEFT TURN
TRAVELLING STRAIGHT AHEAD
MAKING A RIGHT TURN
Right Turn at a Roundabout
Staying in the right hand lane, indicate your approach and maintain this signal until you have passed the exit before the the one you intend to take. Then change to the "left" turn indicator."
In their description for the Enfield roundabout, the have told you to use the left lane (2nd Exit), and then added further clarification which now indicates using the right lane (Right Turn)..
Whereas the RSA rules are simple and indicate usage of the right hand lane..0 -
-
Iwannahurl wrote: »Fair points.
Quick question, as I'm almost dashing out the door. Haven't time to check back before asking.
What are your own circumstance vis-a-vis the new method?
Did you use the old (pre 2006) number-of-exits method and then you changed as soon as you saw the new (post 2006) RoTR guidelines?
Were you already familiar with the 'new' system because you had already used it elsewhere?
Did you get driving lessons which used the new system and hence learned about it that way?
Some other variation on the above?
Thanks in advance.
Well it's not a new system.. the method to describe is different.. but the rules never changed
I learnt to drive in the mid 80's in Ireland, and was allowed to drive solo on the old second provisional.. and was always told the RoTR version used now (left, straight ahead, right)..
I did my official car test in the UK early 90's or so.. and again same explanation was used.
I did my first provisional bike test in the UK in 88 and again same (only rode for a year)..
Did my second provo bike test (CBT) and full licence around 2000, and again always was told and used the old systems of left, S-A, and later exits (right).
I have never used or been told by sequence system in all my years driving.. I have heard of it, but wouldn't use it because as demonstrated it conflicts with the actual rules of the road.
(as per my previous post even the driving sites you linked conflict themselves with the Enfield roundabout.. they specify left (2nd exit), then specify right lane (right turn)..)0 -
Advertisement
-
-
It seems people have been asking the same kind of questions, and prompting the same arguments, for years on Boards. Remarkable.
Here's an illustration from a 2005 thread (which I can't find now). It's a drawing of a real roundabout I believe, but I'm not sure of its location.
Thoughts, in relation to OP and subsequent debate?
0 -
-
Iwannahurl wrote: »
Exact same as railway roundabout in Letterkenny. At that roundabout its Left lane for exits 1&2, Right lane exit 3&4, with markings on lanes to direct traffic.0 -
-
-
Welease mentioned something about members calling up driving teaching centres to get an answer but that still is not the right way to go about it as at the end of the day the educators follow the testers and the testers follow the RSA and the students follow the educators and the RSA. Since the RSA has proven to be incompetent in this matter the definitions of the rules for roundabouts are open to be misinterpreted by anyone in that chain.
Just for clarity.. What i meant was.. those who are willing to believe that the Sequential method is what their teacher meant without any variance, could (if they were really interested) ask their teacher about the Enfield roundabout I posted.. I am 100% sure, the teacher would say "right hand" lane, which therefore proves that the Sequential method is not a rule for all roundabouts, but merely guidance on most roundabouts.. It should not be strictly adhered to where it conflicts with the actual rules of the road. 0 -
-
The RoTR Draft Revised Version for Public Consultation contained the following text:• IF LEAVING BY THE FIRST EXIT, approach and enter the roundabout inPrior to 2006, point #3 had referred to "any subsequent exit" (as this OLD website demonstrates!!):
the left hand lane, signalling a left turn on your approach, keeping your
indicators going until your chosen exit point is reached, and proceed to leave the roundabout at that exit.
• IF LEAVING BY THE SECOND EXIT, approach and enter the roundabout
in the left hand lane but do not signal until you have passed the exit before the one you intend to take, then signal a left turn and leave at the next exit unless road signs or road markings dictate otherwise.
• IF LEAVING BY ANY EXIT AFTER THE 12 O’CLOCK POSITION,
approach and enter the roundabout in the right hand lane signalling a right turn. Keep in the right hand lane (i.e the lane next to the centre). As you pass the exit before the one you intend to leave by, signal a left turn and, when your way is clear, move to the other lane and leave at the desired exit.• IF LEAVING BY ANY SUBSEQUENT EXIT approach and enter the roundabout in the right hand lane signalling a right turn. Keep in the right hand lane (i.e. the lane next to the centre). As you pass the exit before the one you intend to leave by, signal a left turn and, when your way is clear, move to the other lane and leave at the desired exit.
The new RoTR dropped the reference to "the 12 o'clock position", instead using terms such as "straight ahead" and "later exits".
So far, so good. The guidelines changed and all those in this thread who gave Right as the answer to the OP are correct.
However, the Number-of-Exits method is still out there in one form or another, for one reason or another. IMO the problem of conflicting interpretations and recurring Boards arguments (and hence consternation and possible collision on certain real-world roundabouts) has arisen because the newly worded and illustrated example in the RoTR is not sufficiently distinct, clear and comprehensive enough to abolish the older method once and for all. Perhaps there ought not to have been any 'overlap' between the two rules.
Let's call the two 'camps' Numbers and Clocks for convenience. If you look carefully at the illustrated example in the current RoTR, which does not mention 12 o'clock at all, you can see that both Numbers and Clocks can interpret the example given in a way that confirms their own understanding. Why? Because "Left Turn", "Straight Ahead" and "Later Exits" happen to correspond with "First Exit", "Second Exit" and "Any Subsequent Exit".
I am in ongoing correspondence with the RSA on this matter, and I have yet to come to any firm conclusions as to why there is disagreement and confusion, as evidenced by recurring Boards threads and incidents on roundabouts. I repeat my assertion that some motorists (perhaps as many as 50% if this thread is anything to go by!) are still going by the old method in good faith, not out of sheer stupidity and/or culpable ignorance, but because they believe their method of navigating roundabouts complies with the RoTR. The Numbers are validated in their belief by the fact that many if not most roundabouts are of the 'standard' 4-arm design illustrated in the RoTR. On such roundabouts Numbers and Clocks are not in conflict because they are navigating in an identical fashion even though their 'rule' is different.
The RSA themselves say that the 'standard' 4-arm roundabout constitutes "the vast number of cases":
It is important to the Authority that road users are well informed and follow the rules and advice given. We believe that the general rule as outlined on pages 107 – 111 of the Rules of the Road, together with our roundabout campaigns, are accurate, and reflect the reality for Irish road users in the vast number of cases (standard 4 road roundabout).
However, my correspondent in the RSA also says that the Numbers and Clocks methods do not conflict (see below), and that is where I beg to differ. There are enough 'non-standard' roundabouts in Ireland to give rise to recurring incidents in which Numbers and Clocks conflict with each other.
Constructive comments welcome regarding the RSA's response below. I will follow the continued discussion with interest.
My questions to the RSA are in bold:
1. When did driving instructors start to teach the Clock Method?
The ‘Clock’ method (as you refer to it) is a used as a method of communicating with learners as to how to assess and deal with roundabouts. I have checked with our ADI Chief Examiner and as far as he is aware, it dates back to the time when roundabouts were first introduced.
2. Why is the Clock Method not mentioned in the Rules of the Road or in RSA ads?
The ‘Clock’ method is not a ‘rule of the road’ rather it is a teaching tool, used to convey a message to learners. It should be noted that not all learners would respond well to that technique and good instructors vary their methods in response to a learners own individual learning style. An example will be that a number of learners have difficulty with the directions Right & Left and therefore a good instructor will seek to overcome that challenge by using an alternative method of communication. The rules as set out in the Rules of the Road are the correct rules, and should generally be followed by everyone.
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. The ‘clock method’ is simply a way of assisting a learner to determine an appropriate course of action as they approach – it will not work for everyone. There can of course be many more exits than 4. Some roundabouts have only 2 exits whilst others can have 5 or 6, by using the rule as set out in the rules of the road and a method of determining which lane to approach in (in this case we are using what you term the ‘clock method’) learners should be able to plan their negotiation of the roundabout by use of the information & direction signs on the approach.
4. What proportion of drivers on Irish roads are using the Clock Method and what proportion are using the older number-of-exits method?
It is impossible to say what proportion of drivers on Irish roads use any particular method in helping them develop their driving plans. We have plenty of evidence of driving instructors using the Rules of the Road and the ‘clock face’ as a way of reinforcing the safe negotiation of roundabouts.0 -
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement