Passing on the left/Managed Motorways

[trashbat]

Which law? There's no law that explicitly prohibits it is there? I think martine got it right - if they tried to nobble you for something it would presumably be careless driving so it would be down to jurors' or a magistrate's opinion. Evidence that you'd contravened the highway code might not help your case, but the highway code not accommodating something is not the same as the law not accommodating it.

True - although the two are closely linked in terms of DWDCA.

The most frequent situation where I find myself passed on the left (imagine just two lanes to keep the example simple) is when I'm a few cars back in the line in lane 2 overtaking a slower vehicle ahead in lane 1. That situation comes up daily on my drive to and from work and seeing someone in L2 move left and use lane 1 to pass, moving back to lane 2 once they're closer to the slow vehicle is not uncommon.

Although I can appreciate the reality is rarely this simple, to me this begs the question: what are you doing there? Why can't you change to L2 later? If you're not part of the solution etc...

[GJD]

The most frequent situation where I find myself passed on the left (imagine just two lanes to keep the example simple) is when I'm a few cars back in the line in lane 2 overtaking a slower vehicle ahead in lane 1. That situation comes up daily on my drive to and from work and seeing someone in L2 move left and use lane 1 to pass, moving back to lane 2 once they're closer to the slow vehicle is not uncommon.

Although I can appreciate the reality is rarely this simple, to me this begs the question: what are you doing there? Why can't you change to L2 later? If you're not part of the solution etc...

Yes, I see what you mean. I moved (no earlier than necessary) to lane 2 to overtake a previous slow vehicle and I'm now in the line in lane 2 waiting to pass the next slow vehicle. My point was just that I don't think exceptions to the idea that if you are passed on the left you've done something wrong are as rare as you suggested.

[waremark]

"My point was just that I don't think exceptions to the idea that if you are passed on the left you've done something wrong are as rare as you suggested."

Agreed

[MGF]

This depends on whether or not you think queuing in lane 2 until you get the opportunity to overtake is wrong.

[trashbat]

I think it is thoroughly wrong, and I stand by my minimal exceptions.

If it's fine, then you accept that you're quite happy with a driving standard that produces an empty lane for miles behind a solitary truck or caravan.

You're not meaningfully overtaking something if you could safely translate yourself to the same lane as it. You're just catching up to it, same as you would be if you were both in L1. Stop wasting road space, stop reducing everyone down to the same single speed.

If somebody passes on your left whilst you're waiting for Godot, it's your own fault.

Demonstrate good lane discipline and others often follow. Time it well enough and there is no workable gain to be had by trying to undertake you anyway.

I will admit that sometimes this leaves me stuck in a lane behind what I wanted to overtake and having to slow, but I'm not pandering to the lowest common denominator just to avoid that.

[GJD]

I think it is thoroughly wrong, and I stand by my minimal exceptions.

Not sure if we're talking about the same thing here...

If it's fine, then you accept that you're quite happy with a driving standard that produces an empty lane for miles behind a solitary truck or caravan.

The queue is behind someone who is in the process of overtaking the truck/caravan/whatever in lane 1. If I and others want to go faster than that overtaker we're going to have to wait until they've completed their overtake, whichever lane we wait in. We could wait in lane 1. We could wait in lane 2. We could wait some in lane 1 and some in lane 2. Whichever way we do it, we are none of us going to get anywhere faster, nor be able to sort ourselves into the 'correct' order while ahead in every lane is a vehicle going slower than we want to.

You're not meaningfully overtaking something if you could safely translate yourself to the same lane as it. You're just catching up to it, same as you would be if you were both in L1. Stop wasting road space, stop reducing everyone down to the same single speed.

I'm not reducing anyone's speed. I'm one of the people who is having my speed reduced. There is somebody in front of me in L2 going slower than I want to (and in turn there is somebody in front of them too). The person reducing others' speed is the person ahead who is in the process of overtaking.

[MGF]

... If I and others want to go faster than that overtaker we're going to have to wait until they've completed their overtake, whichever lane we wait in. We could wait in lane 1. We could wait in lane 2.

The Highway Code requires you to wait in lane 1 just as it requires others not to overtake in lane 1.

I sometimes queue but I know it is wrong as doing so contravenes the Highway Code.

I prefer not to view my contraventions as right and others' contraventions as wrong.

[GJD]

I prefer not to view my contraventions as right and others' contraventions as wrong.

Not sure how much of a contravention it is. Rule 137 says to move left after overtaking. There is a vehicle in front of me going slower than I want to - have I finished overtaking or am I still stuck trying to overtake? Rule 264 says I should drive in the left hand lane when the road ahead is clear. It isn't clear.

But what if it is a contravention? I quite agree that it is not reasonable to assess the rightness or wrongness of HC contraventions on whether the perpetrator is me or someone else. But I do think it is reasonable to assess it on the basis of whether it has an impact - whether it hampers the purpose behind the HC advice in question. Keeping left is about facilitating overtaking - helping people who want to go faster to get ahead of people who want to go slower. Helping with that is part of my driving plan, but keeping left does not aid that purpose in this example. If this is a contravention, if I, some of us or all of us chose not to contravene it wouldn't make a difference to any of us. We'd all still be stuck until the overtaker ahead had finished. On that basis, if it is a contravention it's not one that scores highly on the scale of wrongness in my view.

[trashbat]

I'm not reducing anyone's speed. I'm one of the people who is having my speed reduced. There is somebody in front of me in L2 going slower than I want to (and in turn there is somebody in front of them too). The person reducing others' speed is the person ahead who is in the process of overtaking.

If someone passes you on the left and, aside from it being on the left, effects a safe overtake, then they made better progress than you. If they choose not to go for that pass, you'd have been holding them up.

It's the same line of thought that sees people failing to let you in at a merge-in-turn. Well, we're all held up by slower traffic ahead - why should I let anyone improve their position in the queue?

[GJD]

I'm not reducing anyone's speed. I'm one of the people who is having my speed reduced. There is somebody in front of me in L2 going slower than I want to (and in turn there is somebody in front of them too). The person reducing others' speed is the person ahead who is in the process of overtaking.

If someone passes you on the left and, aside from it being on the left, effects a safe overtake, then they made better progress than you. If they choose not to go for that pass, you'd have been holding them up.

I don't follow your logic. You're saying that because there is an opportunity for them to pass, they are held up? They would be more held up if I moved into lane 1 and so prevented them driving further down the left hand side of the queue wouldn't they?

What do you suggest I (and the rest of us waiting for lane 2 to clear? - or does this just apply to me?) do differently, and why?

It's the same line of thought that sees people failing to let you in at a merge-in-turn. Well, we're all held up by slower traffic ahead - why should I let anyone improve their position in the queue?

I don't see the analogy. My line of thought is nothing more than I stated before: We could wait in lane 1. We could wait in lane 2. We could wait some in lane 1 and some in lane 2. Whichever way we do it, we are none of us going to get anywhere faster, nor be able to sort ourselves into the 'correct' order while ahead in every lane is a vehicle going slower than we want to.

I want to pass people who want to go slower than I do and help people who want to go faster than I do to pass me. It's just that in this situation neither of those can be achieved because a) we are all constrained to the speed of the vehicle ahead in lane 2 so no amount of shuffling ourselves into different orders is going to help anyone get to the speed they want and b) we have, generally, no way of knowing each other's desired speed so we can't know what order we need to shuffle ourselves into, or even if we need any shuffling. But perhaps you have different objectives?

[trashbat]

Well, for a start, not everyone waiting to overtake is travelling at the same speed as the first vehicle. Until a queue solidifies, people are still catching up to its rear at different rates and slowing down, just like traffic approaching a merge-in-turn.

IMO it's exactly the same as merge-in-turn, only the pinch point is also moving and the merge is from left to right.

If you move out too early, people that were going to get ahead of you have to slow down faster and stay behind, as well as extending the queue backwards. In addition you get people copying that behaviour (after all, what's the difference of being one car back?) until all the traffic for miles is in L2.

As with MIT, the optimal way to arrange things as a benevolent omnipotent traffic god is spread the traffic across all the available tarmac and have it reorder itself just-in-time.

[GJD]

Well, for a start, not everyone waiting to overtake is travelling at the same speed as the first vehicle. Until a queue solidifies, people are still catching up to its rear at different rates and slowing down, just like traffic approaching a merge-in-turn.

I did wonder whether we were talking about the same thing. The queue I'm picturing myself in is solidified. Everybody waiting to overtake is indeed travelling at the same speed - that's the point.

That's the situation I can encounter on a daily basis where being passed on the left would not be an indication that you were in the wrong lane.

[TheInsanity1234]

I prefer the American system of being able to overtake on either side.
Makes life a lot easier for lorries, and reduces the impact the MLH have on the traffic flow.