Undertaking.

[sludgeguts]

This guy had the cheek to criticise me in one of my videos 'what gives you the right to show number plates? You're not such a great driver. I'm qualified for something or other & hold certificates in blah, blah, blah'
He then posts this clip where he berates someone for undertaking whilst he is clearly lane hogging. he then follows the car into the services just to get up close to show the number plate!

 

[flank]

Weird, why would the guy follow someone all the way into the drive thru. Some people have no lives.

 

[Gibson99]

Well number plates aren't exactly private, especially when you're driving on a PUBLIC road. By design they are made to be easily readable by anyone, in case of a hit and run or whatever. And it's illegal to cover them. So I find it unreasonable to expect someone to blur plates on a video taken in a public place. The news doesn't blur them so why would anyone else?

 

[dash riposki]

Never forget this is the internet, and don't be surprised by anything, or expect much.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

What is he qualified for, stalking?

 

[Gibson99]

Never forget this is the internet, and don't be surprised by anything, or expect much.

Thankfully I'm the states we have the first amendment which protects what we can record in public spaces.

 

[Rajagra]

Lane hogging is annoying.
Undertaking is dangerous. When did it become socially acceptable to do it? And why?

 

[Gibson99]

In the US you can pass in any lane you want to on a multi lane road, though most places have signage with things like "slower traffic keep right" or "left lane for passing only".

Not that anyone pays any attention to them...

 

[Deleted member 46308]

In the US you can pass in any lane you want to on a multi lane road, though most places have signage with things like "slower traffic keep right" or "left lane for passing only".

Not that anyone pays any attention to them...

+1

 

[russ331]

Lane hogging is annoying.
Undertaking is dangerous. When did it become socially acceptable to do it? And why?

Undertaking should be made legal in the UK. Vehicles have nearside & offside mirrors, so use them.

What is dangerous is morons occupying the overtaking (outside lane) of dual carriageways, forcing people to break the law to get past them, or to risk road rage by flashing & hooting the prick in front to get out of the way.

 

[Gibson99]

lane hogs are the number one reason i want a paintball gun mounted in my front grille.

and why stickers like this exist:

 

[sludgeguts]

Lane hogging is annoying.
Undertaking is dangerous. When did it become socially acceptable to do it? And why?

Without a rear cam, we don't truly know if this guy was undertaking. If he's just spent an age coming along in lane 1, driven past the slower lane hog then had to pull out to get by the lorry in front, that's not undertaking.
Passing on the left is no more dangerous than passing on the right. If some idiot is determined to pootle along, hogging the lane, they aren't likely to move over into your path. In any case, it is down to the person who is changing lanes to ensure they have room to move over safely.

 

[Rajagra]

Undertaking is dangerous. I despise it.
1) Having people overtaking on both sides is twice as hard to watch out for as if they only overtake on one side.
2) Visibilty is far worse on the wrong side. If you think mirrors cut it, you're wrong. Try driving a vehicle without any rear view other than side mirrors and see how many surprises you get from people appearing from nowhere on the nearside.
3) The Highway code specifies when it is OK to overtake on the inside and when it is not. It is well thought out. If you go against the rule then A) what you are doing is less likely to be expected - hence dangerous - and B) you have no justification for doing it.
4) People who overtake on the inside are reckless and impatient. Even if undertaking were inherently safe, those people make it unsafe.

Sorry, but undertaking is just another example of people doing whatever they like because they feel they should be exceptions to the rules. Another thing dragging down safety on the roads.

 

[jokiin]

 

[Deleted member 46308]

View attachment 16415

That works

 

[sludgeguts]

Undertaking is dangerous. I despise it.
1) Having people overtaking on both sides is twice as hard to watch out for as if they only overtake on one side.
2) Visibilty is far worse on the wrong side. If you think mirrors cut it, you're wrong. Try driving a vehicle without any rear view other than side mirrors and see how many surprises you get from people appearing from nowhere on the nearside.
3) The Highway code specifies when it is OK to overtake on the inside and when it is not. It is well thought out. If you go against the rule then A) what you are doing is less likely to be expected - hence dangerous - and B) you have no justification for doing it.
4) People who overtake on the inside are reckless and impatient. Even if undertaking were inherently safe, those people make it unsafe.

Sorry, but undertaking is just another example of people doing whatever they like because they feel they should be exceptions to the rules. Another thing dragging down safety on the roads.

My rear view mirror can only see my passengers & nothing behind me. I only have my two side mirrors and there is no difference in what they can see. If I pick up a passenger on the wrong side of the road, my nearside mirror can see the whole width of the road to allow me to pull out. If I'm on the right side of the road, my offside mirror also sees the the whole width.

As I said earlier, we do not know if the guy was undertaking or had been in lane 1 for ages - and therefore simply passing on the left - which is perfectly legal.
If you are on a dual carriageway in lane 1 travelling at the legal speed limit & come across someone pootling along in lane 2 doing 5 or even 10mph less - do you..
A. Slow down & match their speed - thereby causing a rolling road block (which is illegal)
B. Pull into lane 2 & follow behind at the same speed they are doing (lane hogging is also illegal)
C. Carry on in lane 1 at the legal limit?
Alternatively (and I have been here more than once), I'm driving along in lane 1 maxed out on my limiter at 62mph, the road ahead is perfectly clear for a great distance.
I come across a lane hogger in lane 2 doing around 55mph.
I am not allowed into lane 3
Aside from my options (A,B,C above) what do you suggest I do?

The answer, and I have this from the guy in charge of motorway policing at Thames Valley Police, is to carry on at the same speed in lane 1.
What I did was not illegal & had the idiot decided to change lanes as I came past, HE would be at fault since you are supposed to use Mirror, Signal, maneuver.

 

[Rajagra]

my nearside mirror can see the whole width of the road

Only beyond a certain distance. In front of that you have a blind spot. Again, think of vehicles that rely only on side mirrors - no rear window or even side windows behind the driver.

Aside from my options (A,B,C above) what do you suggest I do?

D. Flash your lights.
E. Sound your horn (not aggressively.)
and if those fail
F. Drop back in lane 1 and match their speed (no real loss compared to A, safer, and unquestionably legal.)

There are always options that are safe and legal - even if they aren't convenient. Stopping is always an option, something that people so often forget when they argue that they "had no choice but to..."

Besides, in case A I'm not convinced it's illegal to match the speed of someone on your offside. If anyone's creating the rolling road block, it's them, not you.

HE would be at fault

Not much consolation when a crash happens.

 

[Gibson99]

ya know... when i first saw the title of this thread, my immediate thought was the PROFESSION of undertaking...

undertaker
[uhn-der-tey-ker ]
noun
1.
funeral director.

...which in some cases is appropriate.

 

[sludgeguts]

Only beyond a certain distance. In front of that you have a blind spot. Again, think of vehicles that rely only on side mirrors - no rear window or even side windows behind the driver.


D. Flash your lights.
E. Sound your horn (not aggressively.)
and if those fail
F. Drop back in lane 1 and match their speed (no real loss compared to A, safer, and unquestionably legal.).

So, basically you are suggesting I seriously reduce my speed just to suit some lane hogging moron? Especially given that option C is perfectly legal? Yeah, right.
I also think that if plod were to come along & ask why you are blocking the road, you'd be laughed at.
You mentioned that the Highway codes mentions when it is OK to pass on the inside & when it is not...
268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.
And BTW, this part of the code is not law.
So, it is perfectly legal to carry on in your lane, passing the idiot lane hogger to your right.

Also, if passing on the inside is so dangerous, how come they seem to manage perfectly well in other countries? I see loads of clips from America where vehicles are zooming past on both sides.

 

[Rajagra]

268 Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.

Let's change the bolded words to bring out the true meaning:
268 Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.

It absolutely is not saying to overtake individuals who are lane hogging. It's talking about entire lanes (queues) of traffic moving at slightly different speeds.

So, basically you are suggesting I seriously reduce my speed just to suit some lane hogging moron? Especially given that option C is perfectly legal?

Yes. Because C creates unnecessary risk. Like I said, sometimes the safe, legal options aren't convenient. But they are the safest.

I see loads of clips from America where vehicles are zooming past on both sides.

They have vastly superior roads. Designed from scratch without compromise, straighter, with wider lanes and more of them. Their roads are more 'fault-tolerant'.