Should we allow undertaking?

osheen · 25-10-2012 06:30AM

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Question.. why are you doing approx 20 km/h below the limit when at that hour/location there should be nothing stopping you doing the posted 100/62?

You do realise that you are part of the reason why so many people will sit in the middle lane instead?

The legal speed limit for trucks and cars/vans with trailers is 80kph.
I drive a truck on the m50 a couple of times a day and the best moving lane is always the left - nice steady relaxing 80k on cruise .
Its funny that by the time you get to the m1 junction you see the lads who flew past you at finglas trying to cross 4-5 lanes to head north.

P.C. · 25-10-2012 07:50AM

CiniO wrote: »

Yes, but common sense tells us to prohit undertaking

I assume that you are only speaking for yourself.

djimi · 25-10-2012 09:34AM

There is absolutely nothing dangerous about allowing undertaking; once everyone is aware that cars could potentially be passing them on both sides and employ full observation when changing lanes (which they should be doing regardless) then there is nothing dangerous about allowing people to pass cars on the left.

I do agree however that making undertaking illegal is effectively doing away with the concept of a driving lane/overtaking lane system, and will give everyone free reign to effectively drive at whatever speed they like in any lane. This is likely to cause far more of an issue when you get all 2/3 lanes taken up by people driving at 80kpmh with the attitude that "sure cant they go past me on the left or right". For that reason and that reason alone I think allowing undertaking is probably not a good idea.

The change that needs to be made more so than allowing undertaking is an enforcement of current laws. If Gardai were regularly seen on the M7 pulling over cars who are driving in the overtaking lane and if this carried an €80 fine and 2 points then peoples attitude towards lane ettiquite would quickly change and there would be no need for a change in the law regarding undertaking. Of course, its asking far too much to expect our traffic laws to actually be enforced to any meaningful level, but we can always dream...

Procrastastudy · 25-10-2012 09:48AM

Undertaking is allowed in Ireland under the very same rules as the UK highway code.

Undertaking (in an illegal manner) presents a number of issues, mainly related to hazard perception which is dire in this country. For that reason alone it's not worth allowing. That said there would be no need for undertaking if people weren't asshats and sat in a lane they didn't need to be in. You are also equally stupid if you come roaring up behind someone when they are using the outside lane to overtake and you are traveling faster then they are. Hang back, wait for the driver to complete the overtake and move back in then stick your foot down.

Comparing Irish roads to the US, Canada or France is just bonkers. The roads are much better and larger and generally better patrolled. I'm almost certain you cant undertake in the very inside (turning off lanes) in most jurisdictions mentioned in the OP - which given most of our roads are at most two lanes screws that idea from the get go.

They should start limiting people with high numbers of points / aggressive driving styles to 80Kph or banning them from motorways completely and limiting their cars to 50Kph. That or stick a bloody great big spike on the centre of the steering wheel instead of an air bag.

eddieham · 25-10-2012 09:51AM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I seen an Ambulance undertake a 5 series about 2 weeks ago, seriously if a brightly colored van with a siren and ambulance written on it doesn't make people move out of the overtaking lane nothing will.
People are absolute idiots on the road adding another rule won't change anything, and tbh I think most of the idiots in the 2 outside overtaking lanes think undertaking is probably legal as they seem to be seeing it everyday.

I've promised myself before I die I'm going to do a mad max on it form limerick to dublin and any motherfcuker in the wrong lane i'm going to ram them off the road in a tricked out Avensis, some people might die but it'll be for the greater good.

Something along the lines of this!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1tQiMsbDWc

CiniO · 25-10-2012 01:01PM

P.C. wrote: »

I assume that you are only speaking for yourself.

I indeed realised that many times my "common sense" seems to be different that common sense of most posters from this forum.

But look at facts. Undertaking is illegal in most cases in most countries in the world. Therefore my common sense seems to be in line with what seems to work well nearly everywhere.

Top Dog · 25-10-2012 01:30PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I've promised myself before I die I'm going to do a mad max on it form limerick to dublin and any motherfcuker in the wrong lane i'm going to ram them off the road in a tricked out Avensis, some people might die but it'll be for the greater good.

I bet you don't get beyond the Nenagh exit before the front end and radiator are so mullered that you can't go on :pac:

Del2005 · 25-10-2012 03:03PM

CiniO wrote: »

I's say there's two main reasons for making undertaking illegal.
1. It's easier to drive (on motorways) when you have to worry only about changing lanes in outer direction and not really on inner one. If drivers are used to fact no one undertakes, they don't expect anyone coming from there.

But there can be vehicles coming past you on the inside at junctions, so even with undertaking illegal you still need to check your mirrors and blind spot before pulling into any lane. Making undertaking legal would force people to actually use their mirrors to change lanes and not just their indicators

CiniO wrote: »

2. Prohibition of undertaking would lead to anyone choosing random lanes, and in the end at big traffic equaling speeds on every lane to speed way below the limit. When there is driving lane and overtaking lanes, traffic can separate for those going slower and faster.

We already have this with undertaking being illegal, making undertaking legal won't change it but. Proper enforcement is the only way to change this along with minimum speeds for each lane.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Undertaking is allowed in Ireland under the very same rules as the UK highway code.

Undertaking (in an illegal manner) presents a number of issues, mainly related to hazard perception which is dire in this country. For that reason alone it's not worth allowing. That said there would be no need for undertaking if people weren't asshats and sat in a lane they didn't need to be in. You are also equally stupid if you come roaring up behind someone when they are using the outside lane to overtake and you are traveling faster then they are. Hang back, wait for the driver to complete the overtake and move back in then stick your foot down.

The problem arises where you arrive behind a person sleeping in the over taking lane. You come up behind stick on your right indicator no reaction, flash main beams and again no reaction. By law you have to stay behind this nit wit doing 80km/h in the overtaking lane, I've been behind too many cars like this. I give them about 30 secs after the flash and if they haven't pulled over I'm past them.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Comparing Irish roads to the US, Canada or France is just bonkers. The roads are much better and larger and generally better patrolled. I'm almost certain you cant undertake in the very inside (turning off lanes) in most jurisdictions mentioned in the OP - which given most of our roads are at most two lanes screws that idea from the get go.

Outside of major cities most countries only have 2 lane motorways like us. I drove through a lot of the NW USA and all across France and never saw a cop on motorways.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

They should start limiting people with high numbers of points / aggressive driving styles to 80Kph or banning them from motorways completely and limiting their cars to 50Kph. That or stick a bloody great big spike on the centre of the steering wheel instead of an air bag.

Since the only way you can really build up points in this country is for exceeding the posted limit that won't be affective, I find the speeders usually pull over when you come up behind them. It's the 80km/h everywhere brigade that need to be sorted out but they won't be.

The banning of learners from motorways is well enforced, and they should be easy to spot, so how will motorists with these restrictions be readily identifiable to the Gardaí, if they actually bothered with enforcing multi lane road laws?

Matt Simis · 25-10-2012 03:08PM

Del2005 wrote: »

Since the only way you can really build up points in this country is for exceeding the posted limit that won't be affective, I find the speeders usually pull over when you come up behind them. It's the 80km/h everywhere brigade that need to be sorted out but they won't be.

Id agree with the above too, "speeders" tend to be alert to surroundings, Mary and John with their 2.5kids in their MPV are not.

mgbgt1978 · 25-10-2012 03:28PM

CiniO wrote: »

but they also mention about "slow moving traffic", so there is something mentioned about speed. I'm sure 120km/h can't be pulled as "slow moving traffic".

Cinio, "Slow" is not a speed. What one person may class as slow, another may consider too fast.....
Also if you were to pass somebody out who is doing 120 kph (the fastest allowable speed in this country) then you are speeding regardless of what side you pass out on.

CiniO · 25-10-2012 04:00PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Cinio, "Slow" is not a speed. What one person may class as slow, another may consider too fast.....
Also if you were to pass somebody out who is doing 120 kph (the fastest allowable speed in this country) then you are speeding regardless of what side you pass out on.

Yes. But if you overtake on the right side while speeding you only break one rule.
If you undertake while speeding, you brake two.

Zubeneschamali · 25-10-2012 04:14PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Cinio, "Slow" is not a speed. What one person may class as slow, another may consider too fast.....

Your opinion doesn't matter. You will get points when the guards think you overtook on the left and you were not in slow-moving traffic.

We all know what they mean by that, and it's not "any speed that is legal".

mgbgt1978 · 25-10-2012 04:24PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Your opinion doesn't matter. You will get points when the guards think you overtook on the left and you were not in slow-moving traffic.

We all know what they mean by that, and it's not "any speed that is legal".

My opinion matters as much as yours
You MIGHT (not will) get points if a Guard KNOWS (not thinks) that you have commited an offence.

If we all know what they mean by that what exactly is this secret speed that we all know about ?????

Henry Ford III · 25-10-2012 04:39PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

My opinion matters as much as yours
You MIGHT (not will) get points if a Guard KNOWS (not thinks) that you have commited an offence.

If we all know what they mean by that what exactly is this secret speed that we all know about ?????

There is a clarification in the UK highway code on "slow moving traffic". It mentions this as being in "stop/start" conditions, i.e. walking pace or crawling.

Whilst this isn't enshrined in legislation either here or there, it'd be likely given serious consideration in any court case.

The idea that 119kph on a motorway is "slow moving" in this context is nonsense.

Hal Decks · 25-10-2012 04:40PM

A lot of contributors don't seem able to differentiate between 'undertaking' and passing on the left.

Zubeneschamali · 25-10-2012 04:48PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

My opinion matters as much as yours

Exactly. The guard's opinion is what matters.

mgbgt1978 · 25-10-2012 04:49PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

The idea that 119kph on a motorway is "slow moving" in this context is nonsense.

The only person who mentioned 120kph (the nearest to 119 kph) on this thread was Cinio.
Nobody has yet suggested that that would be considered slow moving traffic.

Also while the UK Highway code may well have loads of clarifications this is not the UK.

Zubeneschamali · 25-10-2012 04:50PM

Hal Decks wrote: »

A lot of contributors don't seem able to differentiate between 'undertaking' and passing on the left.

In law, there is no such thing as "undertaking". What is illegal is overtaking on the left, except in three limited situations.

(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of this bye-law, a driver may overtake on the left—

(a) where the driver of the vehicle about to be overtaken has signalled his intention to turn to the right and the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after having overtaken, to go straight ahead or to turn to the left,

(b) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after having overtaken, to turn left at a road junction and has signalled this intention,

(c) in slow-moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver's right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle.

mgbgt1978 · 25-10-2012 04:54PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Exactly. The guard's opinion is what matters.

A guard can have opinions on many different subjects.
I think you will find that it is what is in the Statute Books that matters.
This is page 4 now and still no definitive legal answer.

As you have edited your post I feel the need to do likewise.
Part (c) clearly shows that it is perfectly legal to "overtake" on the left, it gives absolutely no indication of what might be considered slow-moving.....4kph, 8kph...25kph???

CiniO · 25-10-2012 05:45PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

The only person who mentioned 120kph (the nearest to 119 kph) on this thread was Cinio.
Nobody has yet suggested that that would be considered slow moving traffic.

It was you how mentioned, that it was legal to undertake if traffic is moving slower then you.

I mentioned that not only slower than you, but also traffic must be moving slowly and 120km/h definitely wouldn't be considered slowly.

CiniO · 25-10-2012 05:45PM

Hal Decks wrote: »

A lot of contributors don't seem able to differentiate between 'undertaking' and passing on the left.

Because there is no difference. It's the same thing.

Henry Ford III · 25-10-2012 07:58PM

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

The only person who mentioned 120kph (the nearest to 119 kph) on this thread was Cinio.
Nobody has yet suggested that that would be considered slow moving traffic.

Also while the UK Highway code may well have loads of clarifications this is not the UK.

I already metioned it was a UK Highway Code clarification and the limitation of that.

In the absence of a similar Irish clarification however any reasonable judge would be unwise to ignore it.

mfceiling · 25-10-2012 09:53PM

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Question.. why are you doing approx 20 km/h below the limit when at that hour/location there should be nothing stopping you doing the posted 100/62?

You do realise that you are part of the reason why so many people will sit in the middle lane instead?

You know that the limit is the maximum allowed speed and not a target?

Often the traffic is so heavy at that hour that 50 mph is about as fast as any lane is moving.....just so happens that everyone sits in the middle and outside lane (constantly braking) and doing less than 50 mph....while i sail past in the 1st/proper/inside lane which is moving along fine.

Bruthal · 25-10-2012 10:13PM

CiniO wrote: »

I's say there's two main reasons for making undertaking illegal.

1. It's easier to drive (on motorways) when you have to worry only about changing lanes in outer direction and not really on inner one. If drivers are used to fact no one undertakes, they don't expect anyone coming from there.

The day will never come when you dont have to check when returning to the driving lane, even if people hardly ever do undertake. The same level of observation should be used anyway.

I think this undertaking thing is overly stated, as if its a highly dangerous manoeuvre. If the rules were changed tomorrow, many would say its fine now, as if some god of driving has spoken.

K.Flyer · 25-10-2012 10:20PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In law, there is no such thing as "undertaking". What is illegal is overtaking on the left...

Long before we had 3 lane motorways!!

If my memory serves me well the term "Undertaking" originated from the signs that were put on the rear of a certain haulage companies artic trailer units back, I think in late 70s or early 80s, which over the right hand side light cluster read "Overtakers ->" and over the left light cluster "<- Undertakers". The term undertaker being literally that, as in RIP.
It was in an effort to try to stop people attempting to pass long vehicles on the inside when they were swinging out to make a tight left hand turn as there had been so many bad accidents occuring for this reason.
The name then stuck for people attempting to pass other vehicles in what would be considered a dangerous manner, usually on a single lane road.

testarossa40 · 25-10-2012 11:09PM

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Forgetting out ROTR for a moment, can anyone clearly explain why passing a car, which is travelling in the center lane, on the left would be any more dangerous then overtaking on the right??

Given that anyone who changes lane has to take the same precautions weather they are moving left or right.

If you are driving in the left lane and come up on a car in the center lane travelling slower, it is clearly safer to continue as your are then to move across 3 lanes to overtake and then back across 3 lanes again.

Knowing and studying the rules of the road does not, by any stretch of the imagination, make anyone a good driver. I know every rule of F1 inside and out so does that mean I could be world champion??

I've said it before and I still stick by it. Good driving comes from common sense and understanding of car control, not hugging the ROTR book.

Do I think we should allow undertaking? In principle, yes. But I can certainly see an issue in Ireland since so many people haven't got a clue how to safely overtake on any side.

Nail squarely on head, Doc!

CiniO · 25-10-2012 11:39PM

robbie7730 wrote: »

The day will never come when you dont have to check when returning to the driving lane, even if people hardly ever do undertake. The same level of observation should be used anyway.

Of course you will always have to check before returning to your lane.
But there is significent difference between checking the mirror, indicating, and waiting for a minute before you will find a gap in traffic undertaking you on the left, than just having a quick glance in a mirror to make sure it's safe and then move like you do in countries where no one undertakes.

Bruthal · 25-10-2012 11:57PM

CiniO wrote: »

Of course you will always have to check before returning to your lane.
But there is significent difference between checking the mirror, indicating, and waiting for a minute before you will find a gap in traffic undertaking you on the left, than just having a quick glance in a mirror to make sure it's safe and then move like you do in countries where no one undertakes.

If traffic is passing you on the left on open clear motorway, then you shouldnt be in the overtaking lane.

CiniO · 26-10-2012 12:13AM

robbie7730 wrote: »

If traffic is passing you on the left on open clear motorway, then you shouldnt be in the overtaking lane.

If traffic didn't pass on the left, it would be possible to come back to left lane.

testarossa40 · 26-10-2012 12:16AM

CiniO wrote: »

If traffic didn't pass on the left, it would be possible to come back to left lane.

If traffic is passing you on the left, then it is highly unlikely you have any interest whatsoever "to come back to left lane".

Should we allow undertaking?

Comments