You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Ha there been a change in the Law that allows you to ignore them.
Reason being,last week, was stuck behind 3 cyclists, so patiently waited for the end of the white lines on a blind bendy road, the idiot in the van started tooting and shouting abuse, i just ignored him , but the cyclists obviously thought it was me.
Got to a straight bit and as i was about to overtake the cyclists , white van man overtook me,closely followed by an idiot in a volvo.
A few minutes latter,there was the white van stopped, with the volvo in front of it,blue lights flashing disguised in its tail lights.
There is a god i now know.
nice
Awesome!
I hope you stopped in full view, pointed and laughed your head off at the van driver.
You can cross double white lines to overtake a slow-moving vehicle (i.e. one with an Amber flashing light on top) and cyclists only if it is safe to do so.
It is the "if safe to do so" bit that most people struugle to deal with. Nice to hear the van driver get their come-upance though.
You are actually allowed to cross the white lines to overtake bicycles and other vehicles if they are travelling at less than 10mph. [url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070306 ]Rule 129 of the highway code.[/url] Obviously the caveat of "if it is safe to do so" applies here as it does to every rule of the road.
white van man
Why is it significant that the van man was 'white' ? ...............RACIST 🙁
I was so determined not to be a white van man that I bought a black one.
So this week I am a sweating white black van man - it's like a cocking oven in this heat.
Personally there are plenty of places where I'd rather the cars crossed the double white lines than attempted to overtake me without doing so. What's more, in these places it's perfectly safe for them to do so even when I'm doing 20mph+, since the idiots who decide where they go don't know the HC and put them in where it's only unsafe to overtake something car sized doing 40+.
I was so determined not to be a white van man that I bought a black one.
deadlydarcy earlier today. 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
Oh if only it was that cool...think more Postman Pat
On the OP, was it the Karma Police in the volvo?
ernie_lynch - Member
white van man
Why is it significant that the van man was 'white' ? ...............RACIST
ernie, you left off the winky emoticon to show you were joking. Unless, of course, you were being serious, in which case you've just displayed you're an arsehole of spectacular proportions.
Well I can see ernie's winky...
Me too. Btw Graham apple-fanboi S, outside of the thread, valiant fight against the conspiracy theorists. An enjoyable read.
Why thankyou! Though I fear talking sense to RudeBoy might be a lost cause. 😉
oh and for the Apple fanbois
?????
(I think that will probably only work on iPhones)
:?safe to overtake on double white lines?
You'll have to ask the young couple (pregnant wife) I was called to assist today, after their car was turned over, following a head on crash.
Their car was flipped onto its roof by an on-coming car driven by some moron who couldn't wait for a straight bit of road.
Luckily, nobody was seriously hurt. What annoyed me more though was the fact that the idiot who caused the "accident" didn't even have the decency to approach the victims and ask if they were both ok.
My advice? If you can't see a clear bit of road as long as the stopping distance and more, then don't overtake. Would't everyone rather turn up late to their destination, than have the Police knocking on their next of kin's door??? Ends sermon 😕
you've just displayed you're an arsehole of spectacular proportions.
*takes a bow*
Why thank you
*blushes*
LOL 🙂
I thought that said "just displayed your arsehole..." in which case I was getting uncomfortably excited.
I see too many overtakes where the overtaker gets out, round and back in just before the end of the straight bit. I can only assume that in their eyes that is plenty of room, if they are back in before the bend. Problem is, if something comes around the bend towards them at 60mph or more, then everyone is well and truly ****ed.
Theoretically the double whites start at the point at which you should be back in - i.e. if you go over the double whites when pulling back in you're in the unsafe section, but if you're back in before then you're fine - they calculate the position etc from visibility and road speed etc. I have been known to mis-judge my cars ability to accelerate and clip the end of the whites, but usually because I'm trying to give the person I'm passing a good bit of room rather than cutting them up.
I have one point on my commute where the road is narrow (just room for 2 lanes), there's a completely blind corner, and it is on an uphill. At the corner it is if anything more narrow than normal, so I can't ride far enough out that someone could safely pass.
So cars are coming down the hill at 40-45mph (40 limit), I'm riding my bike up the hill at about 12mph. Now, however far out in the road I ride, people will still try to overtake me right on the corner. It's got a lower speed limit than the rest of this A road because it's an accident blackspot, it has double white lines, it has 'slow' signs and 'slow' written on the road, it is just blatantly obviously a really dangerous place to overtake. People just won't stop overtaking me there.
It occurs to me that a 'stupid overtaking' camera, would be dead easy to build, just stick a rear facing camera on that corner, aimed at the wrong lane, and fine/give points to everyone who does it. What a great way that would be to take some of Derbyshire's finest drivers off the roads.
Joe
The 'safe to overtake' part is pretty much irrelevant. Double whites mean it's illegal to cross them (Apart from the 10mph bit), and that's that. So, if you choose to cross them and get done for it, there's no wriggling out of it as in this case.
However, I know of more then one example of small dashed white lins where I wouldn't dream of overtaking, and similarly double whites where it's perfectly safe in the right circumstnaces, or on the right vehicle....
CountZero - Member Humour I recognise that.
the need to have a sign for when to laugh show over liberal tendancies.
they calculate the position etc from visibility and road speed etc.
Really? I thought they made it up. If they do calculate it, then calculations very definitely aren't based on the idea of overtaking a vehicle traveling at the minimum speed for crossing the lines to be illegal - either the law needs changing, or the criteria for putting them in does.
I drive the A68 twice a week (Northumberland to Edinburgh and back).
Several things are very apparent:
- some folk completely ignore the solid white lines.
- it is vitally important to some folk to get one place ahead in a queue, even if it means risking their own life and others.
- many folk either have literally no idea what the national speed limit. (Pop quiz: road with two lanes in either direction, what is the limit?)
On my last trip I witnessed:
- an eejit cross the white lines to overtake a solid line of vehicles at 70mph on a blind summit in thick fog. Cue sudden appearance of oncoming headlights and frantic braking.
- a lorry driver who suddenly slowed 40 every time he passed a speed camera - despite being on a derestricted road.
- some folks using the fog as a reason to turn on every light on the car. Thanks.. now I'm blind.
- other folk who didn't bother with any lights even in the thickest patches of fog. MMmm.. stealthy.
Basically, everyone on the road is an idiot (including me!)
Depends(Pop quiz: road with two lanes in either direction, what is the limit?)
NSL SC?- a lorry driver who suddenly slowed 40 every time he passed a speed camera - despite being on a derestricted road.
Yep, you just proved that one then.Basically, everyone on the road is an idiot (including me!)
Pop quiz: road with two lanes in either direction, what is the limit?
Without central reservation: 60mph (unless otherwise specified)
With central reservation: 70mph (unless otherwise specified)
If we are being particualarly bum gazing about it, in addition to the 10mph rule, double white lines are only legally enforceable if they have cats eyes through the middle of them, however you could still get in trouble for careless driving. Also the amber flashing lights only applies to road maintenance vehicles, not any slow moving vehicle that happens to have a light on it. I think I may go and shut my finger in a door as punishment now.
- a lorry driver who suddenly slowed 40 every time he passed a speed camera - despite being on a derestricted road.
Maybe 'cos that's the limit for an HGV on a single carriageway NSL?
Rule 124:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070304
double white lines are only legally enforceable if they have cats eyes through the middle of them
Really? Got a link to that? It would make an awful lot of them not legally enforceable if so.
Depends
Correct.
NSL SC?
Yep, where he should have been limited to 50 (not that a speed camera can correctly identify the vehicle type anyway, but hey ho).
Yep, you just proved that one then
Because...?
ourmaninthenorth: indeedy. IME some folk, including my missus, don't realise the significance of the central reservation.
Yep, where he should have been limited to 50 (not that a speed camera can correctly identify the vehicle type anyway, but hey ho).
Wasn't there a thread a while back where a guy here got done because he was driving a van which was subject to a lower speed limit - on a camera?
Maybe 'cos that's the limit for an HGV on a single carriageway NSL?
He was the smaller type. (LGV?) So 50 I think.
Either way, tootling along at one speed (whether speeding or not) and then stamping on the brakes every time you see a camera is not really terribly sensible.
He was the smaller type. (LGV?) So 50 I think.
Well you should have said...
As DD says, some cameras can discriminate.
ourmaninthenorth: indeedy. IME some folk, including my missus, don't realise the significance of the central reservation
I ought also to have clarified, that what I said didn't apply to any vehicles with have specific speed restrictions according to their type (e.g. some lorries, etc.).
The significance of the reservation ought to be more than 10mph, though. I've seen some crazy driving on the A556 between Bowdon and Knutsford.
Well you should have said...
Apologies. My knowledge of haulier nomenclature has sadly let me down.
I should have consulted [url= http://www.lorryspotting.com/ ]these guys[/url] 🙂
As DD says, some cameras can discriminate.
Hmmm...
*conspires to mount a large photo of an HGV on front of car to confuse speed cameras...*
Whoa, I didn't "say"...I was just wondering if the rest of you remember the thread...I think he was caught driving a Sprinter/Transit/Trafic type size van.
double white lines are only legally enforceable if they have cats eyes through the middle of them, however you could still get in trouble for careless driving
Hmmm.. [url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070306 ]Highway Code (129)[/url] suggests it is an offence and makes no mention of cats eyes:
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.[Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26]
Well I'm pretty sure the cats eyes thing is bollocks:
[url= http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?ActiveTextDocId=2276590 ]Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 36[/url] says:
Where a traffic sign, being a sign—(a) of the [b]prescribed size, colour and type[/b], or
(b) of another character authorised by the Secretary of State under the provisions in that behalf of the M1 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984,has been lawfully placed on or near a road, a person driving or propelling a vehicle who fails to comply with the indication given by the sign is guilty of an offence.
[url= http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#10 ]The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 regulation 10[/url] says:
10. - (1) Section 36 of the 1988 Act shall apply to each of the following signs -
..
(d) the road markings shown in diagrams 1013.1, 1013.3 and 1013.4 insofar as those markings convey the requirements specified in regulation 26;
..
And [url= http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#sch6 ]diagram 1013.1[/url] looks like this:
[img] 
[/img]
No mention of cats eyes. 😀
Oooh hang on...
[url= http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#31 ]The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 regulation 31 covering Illumination of road markings[/url] says:
31. - (1) Subject to paragraph (2) a road marking shown in diagram 1001 (except when used in conjunction with the road marking shown in diagram 1001.3), 1001.1, 1001.2, 1002.1, 1003, 1003.1, 1003.3, 1003.4, 1004, 1004.1, 1005, 1005.1, 1008, 1008.1, 1009, 1010, 1012.1, 1012.2, 1012.3, [b]1013.1[/b], 1013.3, 1013.4, 1014, 1022, 1023, 1024, 1024.1, 1036.1, 1036.2, 1037.1, 1039, 1040, 1040.2, 1040.3, 1040.4, 1040.5, 1041, 1041.1, 1042, 1042.1, 1046, 1049, 1062, 1064 or 1065 shall be reflectorised.(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a road marking shown in diagram 1003, 1023 or 1049 when varied for use on a cycle track.
(3) Subject to paragraph (4), [b]studs incorporating reflectors or retroreflecting material[/b] and so spaced as to form a single line of studs not less than 3 nor more than 4.5 metres apart shall be fitted -
(a) [b]between the two lines constituting the marking shown in diagram 1013.1[/b], except where that marking is so placed that the continuous lines shown in version B of diagram 1013.1 are more than 175 millimetres apart and are separated by an area of cross-hatching so shown;
(b) between the two continuous parallel lines forming part of the marking shown in diagrams 1013.3 and 1013.4.
(4) Where the marking shown in diagram [b]1013.1[/b] is placed as mentioned in the exception to paragraph (3)(a), the studs mentioned in paragraph (3) shall be fitted either in opposite pairs within the width of each of the two lines or in a single line between those lines.
So he might be right after all.
Isn't law fascinating.....
Tis remarkable the number of people who dont realise the significance of the central-res to the speed limit, I'm fairly sure it was in the theory test when I did it and my dad is well aware of it and he hasnt done a test for decades!
Conversation with my missus shortly after I had passed my test:
Her: You can speed up. It's a 70.
Me: It's only a single carriageway.
Her: It's a dual-carriageway, it has two lanes.
Me: Yes dear.
Maybe the issue is that the Theory Test justs asks something like "What is the National Speed Limit for a car on a dual-carriageway?" rather than checking if folk know what constitutes a DC?
Told you. It just demonstrates how anal my ex traffic officer police driving instructor was. You can check up on the flashing lights thing as well if you want?
joemarshall - Member
I have one point on my commute where the road is narrow (just room for 2 lanes), there's a completely blind corner, and it is on an uphill. At the corner it is if anything more narrow than normal, so I can't ride far enough out that someone could safely pass.So cars are coming down the hill at 40-45mph (40 limit), I'm riding my bike up the hill at about 12mph. Now, however far out in the road I ride, people will still try to overtake me right on the corner. It's got a lower speed limit than the rest of this A road because it's an accident blackspot, it has double white lines, it has 'slow' signs and 'slow' written on the road, it is just blatantly obviously a really dangerous place to overtake. People just won't stop overtaking me there.
i sympathise similar near me and no reasonable alternatives- the council cycling map has it marked as "dangerous" - i'm lucky as not a commute so i can pick other routes for fun - but reading the sustrans iniative - i know it is a lot safer to drive to nearest shops rather than ride - every time i come up the hill - you hit the bend - it narrows - cars/trucks behind can see FA but they still pass and then squeeze you into the kerb as they meet oncoming vehicles - at most a 15 second wait
on this topic a mate of mine scared me badly overtaking cars on some double whites (and at time i was driving 30K a year)- his explanation "i come this way every day"
On the way home from work tonight I was driving up behind a bloke on a bike. There was a cycle lane, but as usual it was full of parked cars. So I slowed down and patiently sat behind him as he got past them. We were probably still doing 15-20mph (in a 30).
After literally ten seconds at this speed the taxi behind me starts driving up to my bumper, revving his engine, flashing his lights and signalling to me to get on with it. There was no where near enough room to overtake safely but clearly he thought I should just run the guy off the road.
Does my tits in that.
The confusing bit regarding the dual carriageway thing is I believe the definition of dual - people aren't sure whether it's dual lanes (i.e. two lanes in one direction) or dual roads (i.e. divided). The uncertainty of NSL on a dual carriageway is apparent when there are cameras with some car drivers slowing to 60mph.
There are many things that divide the road (grass, barriers, kerbs, cables) but as far as I'm aware they're all valid 'divisions' with the exception of a stripe of paint i.e. A556 at Mere in Cheshire (which I believe has a 50 limit??).
The confusing bit regarding the dual carriageway thing is I believe the definition of dual
Only confusing to people who don't bother to read the HC, and to be blunt they shouldn't be allowed on the road.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070308
"A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways."