Cracking down on middle lane hoggers...

[Serial_Apologist]

Not I.

Coolly rational, that's me

That's because you've already got to where you wanted to go, Cali. etc

[Thropplenoggin]

[EdgeleyRob]

[Serial_Apologist]

Regular concrete slab join rhythms

[Beef Oven]

Your freeways have eight sodding lanes, so you don't get middle-lane hoggers!

P.S. Great choice of music

[Nick Armstrong]

the real difficulty is always always traffic volume

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22784983

EDIT: just read all of that, and enjoyed this para

Francis Wheen once described middle Englanders as people who would "'happily drive the full length of the M4 in the middle lane, while listening to Andrew Lloyd Webber's Requiem".

[BBMmk2]

thanbk goodness something is beimng done about this thoughtless people!!! Motorway nighmares!! I am glad also that the fgi9ne for non-wearing of seatbelt and use of mobile phone fines have increased and 3 penalty points to boot!!

[Serial_Apologist]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22784983

Interesting the observations by the IPS at Leeds Uni about elderly drivers being more inclined to hog the middle lane out of a dawning awareness of diminishing reactive powers leading to expectations of danger when overtaking.

I always felt that in a situation of light motorway traffic it was fine to keep to the middle lane at 70 mph if traffic in the left hand lane was doing between say 50 and 60 mph. There seemed little point in weaving in and out; less use of the accelerator and keeping to a consistent speed saved on fuel use; and other drivers would feel more at ease if they knew I was driving with consistency. Naturally I would keep an eye on the rear view mirror and pull into the slow lane if someone was advancing from behind. But, would such, to me safe driving, be considered worthy of punishment under the proposed new rules, I wonder?

[Beef Oven]

Interesting the observations by the IPS at Leeds Uni about elderly drivers being more inclined to hog the middle lane out of a dawning awareness of diminishing reactive powers leading to expectations of danger when overtaking.

I always felt that in a situation of light motorway traffic it was fine to keep to the middle lane at 70 mph if traffic in the left hand lane was doing between say 50 and 60 mph. There seemed little point in weaving in and out; less use of the accelerator and keeping to a consistent speed saved on fuel use; and other drivers would feel more at ease if they knew I was driving with consistency. Naturally I would keep an eye on the rear view mirror and pull into the slow lane if someone was advancing from behind. But, would such, to me safe driving, be considered worthy of punishment under the proposed new rules, I wonder?

Very interesting! Very dangerous! You need your licence revoked

[Serial_Apologist]

Very interesting! Very dangerous! You need your licence revoked

You're obviously right, though I can't quite think why. I don't drive these days, btw - well, I only ride a bike - not of course allowed on motorways.

[Beef Oven]

you're obviously right, though i can't quite think why. I don't drive these days, btw - well, i only ride a bike - not of course allowed on motorways.

tfft!!!!

[french frank]

must be because i rarely drive on motorways these days, whenever i do the lh lane seems perpetually stuffed with lorries ....

Indeed, some stretches of motorway (usually on an upward gradient) have signs warning that the inside lane is likely to have slow moving traffic. In 3-lane motorways, I think S_A is right: when the inside lane has a flow of relatively slow moving traffic, it's better to keep at a faster speed in the middle rather than keep on pulling out and pulling in. The real annoyance is when the inside lane is pretty well empty, and motorists stay in the middle lane.

[Quarky]

Interesting the observations by the IPS at Leeds Uni about elderly drivers being more inclined to hog the middle lane out of a dawning awareness of diminishing reactive powers leading to expectations of danger when overtaking.

I always felt that in a situation of light motorway traffic it was fine to keep to the middle lane at 70 mph if traffic in the left hand lane was doing between say 50 and 60 mph. There seemed little point in weaving in and out; less use of the accelerator and keeping to a consistent speed saved on fuel use; and other drivers would feel more at ease if they knew I was driving with consistency. Naturally I would keep an eye on the rear view mirror and pull into the slow lane if someone was advancing from behind. But, would such, to me safe driving, be considered worthy of punishment under the proposed new rules, I wonder?

I do a lot of driving on M25 and other motorways, and I think matters have to be judged in the light of current traffic flows and current driver attitudes.

The major danger factors in my mind are that firstly a high proportion of car drivers and van drivers drive well over the speed limit, somewhere in the region 80 -100 mph. Further these drivers, and many others, are fond of cutting in on traffic in the inner lanes, leaving little or no safety margin. Unfortunately this type of manoeuvre happens in a flash, and is difficult for Police to observe.

The driver stuck in the middle lane exacerbates this situation, whether he is driving very slowly, about 50 mph, or up near the speed limit of 70 mph. Faster drivers find their room for manoeuvre significantly restricted.

My view is that the slow lane is underutilised on British Motorways. Lorries do not travel much more slowly than cars, and often make better time in heavy traffic situations. Frequently I am sorely tempted to "undertake" in the slow lane when I have a clear run, with slowly moving cars in the middle lane. And of course with four lanes, as much of the M25 now is, the rule about undertaking is less clear.

On the Continent, there is a much stricter driver attitude to driving out of the slowest lane, and I will find myself hooted and flashed if I stay out in a faster lane longer than necessary. I personally favour this approach.

Stay in the inner lane, move out as and when necessary - don't go to sleep in the middle lane.

[Simon B]

Whilst not disagreeing with the essence of your remarks, since it seems to be a misconception lodged in what passes for the mind of many perpetrators of this curse of motorway (and often overlooked, dual carriageway) driving, a pedant writes:

"the slow lane" does not and never has exist(ed). No such thing. There's a driving lane and 1 or maybe 2 or 3 overtaking lanes.

I'm sure it was just a shorthand/oversight given everything else you said. However, expunging the concept of this mythical lane from the public (un)consciousness is one vital step in stamping out the scourge. That along with compulsory re-education of everyone (millions apparently) who thinks the national speed limit on dual carriageways is 60mph, not 70.

Also, any time and place this subject arises, one of the warring factions that almost instantly arises is those taking the "But if I'm doing 70mph, no-one should overtake me, the end" line. A crucial problem with this stance is that many private cars (less so commerical and goods vehicles) have speedometers that overread significantly at motorway speeds, usually around 6%-9% and usually as a deliberately engineered-in margin for error. However, some people choose to get theirs calibrated properly...

It's all hot air anyway. I'd be thrilled if trafpol started dishing out fines like confetti for the quadrillion instances of lane hogging that must occur every year, but I'll be amazed if it happens. As with mobile phone use, the only viable detection mechanism is trafpol out on the road. On most of the trunk road network they're an endangered species seen only in the daytime when organising the clearing up of wreckage or late at night on largely empty motorways picking off outliers of the speed distribution for easy prosecution stats enhancement but negligible risk mitigation effect.

Makes for good copy though.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

But it's always about the motorist.
Never about the pedestrian, whose domain has been virtually obliterated.