Author Topic: Solid white line overtaking rules...  (Read 3584 times)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #25 on: August 26, 2020, 10:29:36 am »
What alteration would you like to see made to the rule?
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #26 on: August 26, 2020, 02:26:16 pm »
The law probably qualifies as an ass re. this overtaking rule.  I can't see the enforcement regime changing, so either this means doing research & increasing the threshold to an updated '25' mph, which may be neutral or worse wrt cyclist safety.  Status quo is more likely, with cyclists being deemed to forever be doing <10mph.  I have heard that that 10mph was set aeons ago when most motor vehicles accelerated like slugs, but then the traffic density was far less than nowadays, which possibly partly nullifies the effect of faster accelerating vehicles(?)

Have I mentioned Presumed Liability..?    :)  As a potential general dampener on drivers doing stupid things around cyclists...
Destroying rainforest for economic gain is like burning a Renaissance painting to cook a meal.  EOW.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #27 on: August 26, 2020, 02:42:34 pm »
I think the exemption for overtaking cyclists was campaigned for CTC as then was in order to reduce close passes, but I don't know where the 10mph came from. I'm sceptical that raising it to 59mph or abolishing it completely would have much effect on driver behaviour.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #28 on: August 26, 2020, 09:34:58 pm »
In these days of EA bikes surely there would be a case for lifting the speed to the legal limit of the electric assistance, on the grounds that an increasing number of bicycles will be doing that speed as EA grows in popularity. BITD there was an assumption that "normal" cyclists went at 10mph!

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2020, 09:51:26 pm »
From what I remember a sokitely ages ago double white lines should only be being used where there is a visibility issue and set so that they suit the overtaking abilities of around 80% of road users.

Based on that If used correctly no one should be able overtake a bike, horse or road roller travelling at 10mph safely either.

Can't remember if that was from a visit to roads polis in Forfar or the local trunk road operstor in Perth.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk


Feanor

  • It's mostly downhill from here.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #30 on: August 26, 2020, 10:12:11 pm »
My impression is that double white lines have over the years over-extended to a point where many drivers ignore them, and they have become meaningless.

I don't know what the criteria are for painting them, but I think it has ratcheted down.

Personally, I'd prefer a safe wide overtake on an otherwise safe road than a needlessly close-pass so as to not step on the cracks.

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #31 on: August 26, 2020, 11:13:32 pm »
I don't know what the criteria are for painting them, but I think it has ratcheted down.

I'm not sure how highway authorities ever found themselves in the business of deciding when it is or isn't safe to overtake. I supposed once you decide to ban overtaking in one particularly dangerous place, it's a slippery slope.

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2020, 11:18:03 pm »
Arguably it all started when road safety came along, and that came along because leaving it up to road users to behave sensibly proved deadly.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk


Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #33 on: August 27, 2020, 09:12:02 am »
I don't know what the criteria are for painting them, but I think it has ratcheted down.

I'm not sure how highway authorities ever found themselves in the business of deciding when it is or isn't safe to overtake. I supposed once you decide to ban overtaking in one particularly dangerous place, it's a slippery slope.
If you are going to start somewhere a slippery slope is as good as any.

Paul

  • L'enfer, c'est les autos.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #34 on: December 31, 2020, 10:11:55 am »
The law probably qualifies as an ass re. this overtaking rule.  I can't see the enforcement regime changing, so either this means doing research & increasing the threshold to an updated '25' mph, which may be neutral or worse wrt cyclist safety.  Status quo is more likely, with cyclists being deemed to forever be doing <10mph.  I have heard that that 10mph was set aeons ago when most motor vehicles accelerated like slugs, but then the traffic density was far less than nowadays, which possibly partly nullifies the effect of faster accelerating vehicles(?)

Have I mentioned Presumed Liability..?    :)  As a potential general dampener on drivers doing stupid things around cyclists...

It's not a great rule, partly because it is so complicated. However, it does say:

Quote
Rule 129

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
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158

It should not be read in isolation, but in conjunction with the general rules on overtaking: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203, specifically:

Rule 162
Before overtaking you should make sure

- the road is sufficiently clear ahead
- road users are not beginning to overtake you
- there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake.


Rule 163
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should

- not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake
- use your mirrors, signal when it is safe to do so, take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out
- not assume that you can simply follow a vehicle ahead which is overtaking; there may only be enough room for one vehicle
- move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. Move back to the left as soon as you can but do not cut in
- take extra care at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance
- give way to oncoming vehicles before passing parked vehicles or other obstructions on your side of the road
- only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
- stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left
- give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215).


Frankly, if drivers heeded rules 162 and 163, you wouldn't need solid white lines.
What's so funny about peace, love and understanding?

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #35 on: December 31, 2020, 10:34:35 am »
What alteration would you like to see made to the rule?

If the law is unenforceable and an ass as it is then perhaps the rule should be simplified to no overtaking at any time.  The enforcement element will not improve but in the event of accidents there will be a much clearer idea of who might have transgressed the rules.
Also make it strict liability if it is not already to make wriggling out of it harder. 

My view of the rules of the road is that they should be there to enable safe road use for everybody and not just for a single class of person, i.e. motorists.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #36 on: December 31, 2020, 10:42:12 am »
That would be an awful rule and would probably lead to pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders being social-pressured off the roads.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #37 on: December 31, 2020, 11:12:01 am »
That would be an awful rule and would probably lead to pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders being social-pressured off the roads.

Tractors...


One of my mates was close to lifting a car out of the gateway to a livestock field yesterday.

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #38 on: December 31, 2020, 12:37:39 pm »
That would be an awful rule and would probably lead to pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders being social-pressured off the roads.

Given that solid white lines are not overly common and occur in areas where it is deemed dangerous to overtake, I personally don't really think that would be any worse than it is now.  The social pressure element is already here and already strong.

It's a bit like not using your mobile whilst driving:  impossible to police but in the event of an accident it helps with determining what is likely to really have happened. 

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #39 on: December 31, 2020, 12:47:07 pm »
That would be an awful rule and would probably lead to pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders being social-pressured off the roads.

Given that solid white lines are not overly common and occur in areas where it is deemed dangerous to overtake, I personally don't really think that would be any worse than it is now.  The social pressure element is already here and already strong.

It's a bit like not using your mobile whilst driving:  impossible to police but in the event of an accident it helps with determining what is likely to really have happened.
Oh. So when you said
If the law is unenforceable and an ass as it is then perhaps the rule should be simplified to no overtaking at any time. 
You meant the law on overtaking where there are solid white lines, whereas "at any time" implied to me "at any time" ie even where there are no solid white lines. In that case, it might be a good idea.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #40 on: December 31, 2020, 12:53:44 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #41 on: December 31, 2020, 01:05:33 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

A tad pedantic.  If you insist, why not simply say moving vehicle or other road user or specify "except stationary vehicles and other road users".

Does one in fact overtake a stationary vehicle or is that simply passing?

I forgot just how extreme people get in their vexed interpretations. 

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #42 on: December 31, 2020, 01:11:39 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Isn't this partly why the double white line concept was introduced in the first place, the single solid "absolutely do not cross" line was proving problematic.


FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #43 on: December 31, 2020, 01:13:52 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

A tad pedantic.  If you insist, why not simply say moving vehicle or other road user or specify "except stationary vehicles and other road users".

Does one in fact overtake a stationary vehicle or is that simply passing?

I forgot just how extreme people get in their vexed interpretations.

It's illegal to park on double whites.

It's not actually overtaking that is banned by double\single white lines but crossing the line that is (where double has exceptions to allow things to work)

What this means for breaking down... dunoh.

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #44 on: December 31, 2020, 01:19:23 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

A tad pedantic.  If you insist, why not simply say moving vehicle or other road user or specify "except stationary vehicles and other road users".

Does one in fact overtake a stationary vehicle or is that simply passing?

I forgot just how extreme people get in their vexed interpretations.
The current rule says not cross solid lines except “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.”. Interestingly pedestrians and other very slow vehicles seem to be excluded from the exclusion and it is not clear whether the 10mph applies only to road maintenance vehicles.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #45 on: December 31, 2020, 01:21:36 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Isn't this partly why the double white line concept was introduced in the first place, the single solid "absolutely do not cross" line was proving problematic.
When was that? I don't remember there ever being a single solid line.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #46 on: December 31, 2020, 01:24:50 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Isn't this partly why the double white line concept was introduced in the first place, the single solid "absolutely do not cross" line was proving problematic.
When was that? I don't remember there ever being a single solid line.
You can have a single solid line accompanied by a dashed line meaning it is only ok to cross from one side. Always thought that was dangerous as you would not be able to get back.

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #47 on: December 31, 2020, 01:39:07 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Isn't this partly why the double white line concept was introduced in the first place, the single solid "absolutely do not cross" line was proving problematic.
When was that? I don't remember there ever being a single solid line.
Double white line came in in the 1960s iirc, there's a video somewhere on the interweb showing that the Scottish office were somewhat behind the MoT at implementing them.

You're more likely to find a single white line marking the lane division at a dual carriageway junction now that on a single carriageway road.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk


FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #48 on: December 31, 2020, 01:41:51 pm »
So where there are solid lines overtaking a broken down vehicle would be a illegal in the suggested revision ? What about cyclists overtaking the massive tailback ?

Isn't this partly why the double white line concept was introduced in the first place, the single solid "absolutely do not cross" line was proving problematic.
When was that? I don't remember there ever being a single solid line.
You can have a single solid line accompanied by a dashed line meaning it is only ok to cross from one side. Always thought that was dangerous as you would not be able to get back.

That's a variant of the double white line.

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Solid white line overtaking rules...
« Reply #49 on: December 31, 2020, 01:42:40 pm »
1959 they were introduced

http://www.trafficsignsandmeanings.co.uk/history-road-markings-how-were-first-designed.html

Can be found in the older Blackwall tunnel
https://goo.gl/maps/gPKFvQZkJy8tpxrp9

You'll also find a mega rare minimum speedlimit there too.