From: Clive George on
On 11/05/2010 00:53, Mortimer wrote:
> "Clive George" <clive(a)> wrote in message
> news:H8adnWmP5qp7CHXWnZ2dnUVZ7vGdnZ2d(a)
>> On 11/05/2010 00:07, Mortimer wrote:
>>> I'd seen two white transit vans, one UK reg and one Dublin reg,
>>> travelling together and playing leapfrog as I was travelling south on
>>> the A1. At one point as I overtook them in Lane 2, they both pulled out
>>> from Lane 1 to Lane 3 immediately I'd gone past, passing *very* close
>>> behind me. So I was aware that they were playing silly buggers.
>> And I'm guessing they wanted you to move to L3 to allow them to do
>> their stuff while you passed.
> No doubt. But why should I leave an empty lane between me and the
> vehicles that I'm overtaking. There may even have been faster traffic
> overtaking me in L3, I can't remember.

Depends on what the vehicles are doing in the other lane, but if you see
a vehicle in L1 who wants to overtake, sticking in L2 can be unhelpful.

>> I'd have probably just tickled the accelerator a bit more so he'd not
>> have caught up. 80 isn't really that fast on 3 lane DC.
>> "abort your acceleration" - 50-70 doesn't take that long...
> In the time that I did 50-60, Chummy had moved into L3, still travelling
> at 50. As I carried on accelerating, I could see him retreating from me,
> but in L3. Should I stop accelerating and maybe brake to let him past or
> should I carry on accelerating and let him say "oh well, worth a try"
> and move back into L2 behind me?

The answer to that one is obvious : carry on accelerating as normal.

> I chose the latter. Had he been a
> powerful car which was gaining on me, I might have stopped accelerating
> to make it easier for him to get past me, and then resumed after he'd
> got past and was disappearing into the distance.

On a 3 lane DC? I'd not have stopped accelerating for that. There's
space - let them sort themselves out.

From: ChelseaTractorMan on
On Mon, 10 May 2010 08:29:25 -0700 (PDT), "Man at B&Q"
<manatbandq(a)> wrote:

>You said "several cars behind her had to brake rather sharply". That
>implies they were to close in the first place.

if the lead car braked sharply and then the following cars did the
same and stopped, doesn't sound like it.
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on
On Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:15 +0100, Harry Bloomfield
<harry.m1byt(a)> wrote:

>You should always leave an adequate gap ahead of you. If none of the
>drivers do and the one at the front stop sharply, you get sharp braking
>throughout the line of vehicles. If just one leaves a sensible gap he
>and those behind him can brake much more gently.

you are going to have to leave a lot of space in a lot of queues to
allow following cars to brake gently when the lead car makes "a near
emergency stop".
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on
On Mon, 10 May 2010 15:50:21 +0100, Mike Barnes
<mikebarnes(a)> wrote:

>>A variation on that is that the car in front is slowing down to turn
>>right, and actually stops to let somebody else turn right from the side
>In NZ, that's the *law*. It seems to work quite well.

good for them. Much more sensible.
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on
On Mon, 10 May 2010 17:22:45 +0100, "Zimmy" <z(a)y.x> wrote:

>Where does it say main road users should give way to traffic coming from
>side roads even though they have the give way lines painted across them?

nobody suggested it should say that.
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Prev: Green MP
Next: Motoring policy