From: martin@praxis.co.uk (Martin Croxford)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Rear End Drivers etc
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:40:34 GMT
Distribution: uk
Organization: Praxis, Bath, U.K.


Jonathan Walker (jon_w@sn4401.oldham.gpsemi.com) wrote:
: What is a safe way to rid your rear end of a dangerous
: driver.

: The scenario.... cars in the middle lane safe distant apart 
: traveling 60 to 65mph I'm overtaking 70 mph safe distance
: from cars in front conditions cold, clear but dark (7.45am).

:  If a motorist (?) persists in driving 12 to 14ft away your 
:  rear bumper at 70 pushing you to 80mph in the outside lane with nowhere for
:  you to go , is it such a good idea to 'brake' giving them
:  a fright of their lives causing them to flash their lights
:  sound their horn, and in an obscure form of sign language
:  express what a foolish maneuvre one has made.

:  Of course one must ignore the fact that 7 people died on the 
:  very same motorway the previous day, and the radio warnings to
:  drive with care."

: Or do I have carry on ignoring this motorists presence.

David Shepherd (des@inmos.co.uk) replied:
> my technique is to basically ignore them and wait until there is a
> suitable gap in the middle lane then pull into it slowly doing a full
> MSM routine.

I agree completely with David Shepherd's answer to Jonathan Walker's
scenario above. I've only found myself in this situation a couple of
times and I've tried flashing my hazard's and/or fog lights to warn the
driver behind of their foolishness, but ultimately continued driving in
the normal way and pulled in when safe to do so. The flashing has worked
most times - the driver appeared to be unaware of his/her error until
signalled and pulled back to a safer distance. On one occasion, however,
the driver *decreased* the gap and started repeated flashing; this was at
night, dry road, average traffic, me at 70 - 75 mph in the 3rd lane.
Scary stuff.  

But this whole thread brings up one of the most frustrating and dangerous
aspects of motorway driving, namely "failing to return to the nearside
lane following overtaking" or hogging the 2nd/3rd lane. In the scary case
above the traffic in the 2nd lane was moving at about 65 - 70, but there
was nothing in the 1st lane for at least 500 yards. The driver behind me
should have waited a safe distance behind until I pulled in, however the
potentially dangerous situation would never have occurred if the
2nd-laners had been in the 1st lane.

One might argue that I had no business to be travelling at 70 - 75, and
that the driver behind had no business to be travelling faster than that.

My view is that it is reasonable to drive above 70 when the conditions
allow. The important point about speed in any driving situation is to drive
within the limits imposed by the road/traffic conditions, the weather
conditions, the ability of the car, the ability of the driver. This view
is supported by the practical application of the law by the police who
advocate an increase in the speed limit to 80mph. Yes, it hasn't happened
yet, but the police impose a practical speed limit of 80 in good
conditions. 

The Highway Code requires drivers to move back in after overtaking slower
vehicles. It also requires drivers to drive with consideration for other
road users. This includes not obstructing other road users. Drivers who
remain in the 2nd lane cause an obstruction and increase congestion in
the 3rd lane - this is the case even when the speed limit is being kept
by all concerned, in heavy traffic, in poor weather etc. The
"legal-speed" drivers in the 2nd lane are committing an offence by not
pulling over, not that they can be sure that they are driving at the
legal speed anyway; the average speedo is not accurate and tends to be
conservative. OK, if my speedo says 90 I don't know if I'm driving at 81
or 83 or whatever, but I do know I'm > 70. But what if my speedo says 70 ?
I could be at 63 or 65, or 75. 

Drivers should aim to use the inner most lane except when overtaking. If
there is nobody coming up behind or if it would be necessary to pull out
very soon after pulling in it is reasonable to stay in lane. The speed
issue is more contentious, but even if I'm driving at 80 I will still use the
1st lane...there is always faster traffic coming up behind and I would
rather have it in front of me than three feet behind me, or three behind
somebody in the 3rd lane prevented from moving in by me unnecessarily
remaining in the 2nd lane.

The "hogging" problem (and the "speed inappropriate for conditions"
problem) will only be solved by education. A friend recently
told me, eight weeks after passing his test, that the 2nd lane is the
cruiser lane, the 1st lane is the slow lane and the 3rd lane is the fast
lane. This would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous. Changing tack
slightly, I advocate a two-tier driving test, with the current test the
basis for the first tier, and a system that limits performance to driving
experience, for example two years experience required to drive a 1600cc
car. I'd also like to see the introduction of re-testing and the showing of
accident video nasties during driving training (and possibly on TV). I
don't believe that stiffer sentences by themselves will help - people
(and I include myself in all this) need to be persuaded that their
driving needs to be improved and need to be told how to do it. There are
a thousand and one problems with these measures, but the current average
driving ability must be improved somehow. 

As for the "hogging" problem, I'd be interested to hear how others deal
with it. I tend to grin and bear it...flashing people in front sometimes
works, but more often encourages retaliation. I prefer to slow down and
wait for the traffic to clear rather than, say, overtake on the inside.

This posting is quite long enough. I hope there will be some debate. 

--
Martin Croxford
martin@praxis.co.uk
Newsgroups: uk.transport