Only in Md.- Woman Cited for Driving 63 in a 65 MPH Zone

[gunderwood]

As for your question, just because you are passing doesn't magically make you in the right. The same rules apply. If there is another more left lane, they can use that. If there isn't you should speed up and complete your more quickly so as to stop impeding the flow. Additionally, I would suggest that your pass was ill conceived and executed if someone has the opportunity to do that to you. I.e. you're basically speeding and lane camping. As part of your passing plan, you should have already considered the relative speeds of the vehicles behind you before executing the pass. If you can not complete the pass in time, you either need a new plan or need to wait. Just because the space beside you is empty, doesn't mean it is a good or valid idea to start a pass.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You mean that if I'm already going all the law allows plus all they'll let me by with, I should speed up and invite a ticket just because somebody else doesn't know he's increased his chances of getting a ticket by at least an order of magnitude by going faster than 74? Seems to me that if I'm travelling as fast as possible and at the ragged edge of prudence and am overtaking in the left lane, I have no obligation to speed up. That said, I do always accomodate a faster vehicle by changing to the right lane if I can do so without speeding up or slowing down. Basically, I set my cruise and try to leave it set.

If you can not pass reasonably quickly and safely, you shouldn't be passing at all...regardless of how fast you are going. Seriously, if your passing at 74MPH, while the other driver is going 72MPH, perhaps you should re-evaluate the whole idea of passing in the first place. Any speed differential more than ~2-3MPH results in a passing time of only a few seconds, in which case your scenario isn't a problem.

3MPH is 4.4fps, with a car being on the order of 25ft long, it will only take ~5s to cover that distance. However, through in the buffers, etc. and lets say your triple that time to 15s. Not long at all.

[dorminWS]

Gunderwood, sometimes you come across like the chair of a homeowners' association. This is one of those times, I think.

[WRW]

@ gunderwood, Am I right interpreting your math to mean you follow at one car length and allow the same in front of the passee? I understand you have considerably more training than most, but that is not what I would recommend for the general populace. The guideline used to be one car length/10 mph. That was lengthened to the 2 second following distance and, hey, if two seconds is good three must be better.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

@ gunderwood, Am I right interpreting your math to mean you follow at one car length and allow the same in front of the passee? I understand you have considerably more training than most, but that is not what I would recommend for the general populace. The guideline used to be one car length/10 mph. That was lengthened to the 2 second following distance and, hey, if two seconds is good three must be better.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

It's not ideal for sure. It is often what happens in NOVA traffic quite frequently though. If you leave 2 car lengths or more, you'll magically find that another car has materialized in that space. It's also why out of towners cause so much havok on I95, they simply aren't used to driving that close.

To be fair, it's also the reason we get half-a-dozen or more cars involved in a fender bender.


As a side note, I had to do a hilarious third-world driving simulation. Basically, you get 6 cars, line them up three abreast and two deep. Drive around an oval at 25MPH (slow enough to mitigate real damage because there is definitely going to be some), but the desired was only 6" apart and you'd get yelled at for anything more than a foot. Each position in the group is assigned a number and after getting the formation down, the instructor would call out two cars numbers and those cars would have to switch places as quickly as possible. Oh the hilarity, dents, and lack of mirrors!!!

After a bit of that, they'd start swapping 3 cars at a time.

Edit: Forgot to mention, there are no turn signals, lights or other means of communicating (not that they would still be there anyways). The idea was driving in very close proximity and yet reading the other drivers intentions via car behavior well enough to quickly execute a complex set of maneuvers around the other drivers who had to maintain formation.

[gunderwood]

Gunderwood, sometimes you come across like the chair of a homeowners' association. This is one of those times, I think.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but you posed a hypothetical and asked what should be done. If you can't complete the pass without causing other drivers to take evasive maneuvers, you shouldn't do the pass. The same applies to all forms of passing, some of which may cost you your life if you misjudge it. e.g. passing on a two lane road.

[SHMIV]

My general feeling on passing is that it should be done quickly. I hate having cars ride next to me, regardless of the vehicle I happen to be driving. I generally pass quickly, and get some distance between myself and the other car before resuming normal speed and sliding back in the right lane. If someone is passing me, I often will drop my speed a couple of notches, in order to get them around me faster. Especially at night; I want those lights out of my mirror!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[dorminWS]

Gunderwood, sometimes you come across like the chair of a homeowners' association. This is one of those times, I think.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but you posed a hypothetical and asked what should be done. If you can't complete the pass without causing other drivers to take evasive maneuvers, you shouldn't do the pass. The same applies to all forms of passing, some of which may cost you your life if you misjudge it. e.g. passing on a two lane road.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Been driving for around 48 years; mostly on the worst roads and in the worst conditions in the Commonwealth, and I ain't dead yet. I'm either doing OK or I'm so damn lucky it doesn't matter.

[WRW]

I've read and reread dormin's hypothetical case of passing and saw nowhere that evasive action should have to be taken by a following driver. What I did see was a driver that had established himself in the passing lane in order to pass and a second driver irritated that he wasn't passing fast enough to suit.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

I've read and reread dormin's hypothetical case of passing and saw nowhere that evasive action should have to be taken by a following driver. What I did see was a driver that had established himself in the passing lane in order to pass and a second driver irritated that he wasn't passing fast enough to suit.

If you're in the left hand lane and passing slowly (where it takes 15-30s to complete the pass) and another car has the ability to close on you and then begin flashing lights, the only way for that to occur is if they are traveling observably faster than you (i.e. if you had checked your mirrors properly you would have likely known that to be the case and should have waited until they also passed you). In such a case, in order to not run into the back of you, they had to take evasive action (namely brake, perhaps rather hard) and so did anyone following them. You see this a lot in dense but high-speed traffic; NOVA traffic.

I would point out that the ONLY reason an accident didn't occur was because the faster driver was paying enough attention to finish braking in time to avoid it (depending on speeds and the negligence of the initiating driver, even that may not be enough to avoid an accident). The driver who initiated the pass did NOT evaluate if they could complete the pass safely or mis-evaluated it. Had the initial passing driver not started the pass, the situation would never have materialized and no driver would have had to take evasive action. This is true regardless of the speeds involved. Simply because an accident did not occur, does not make the initiating driver safer or better.

This situation is similar to when drivers attempt to merge onto a highway at an inappropriate speed (e.g. 25MPH when traffic is moving at 80MPH). I.e. they simply moved over without any regard to how fast traffic behind them is actually moving.

Edit: We get away with this often in the USA because of the relatively limited speed differentials. On a highway with unlimited or very high speed limits like the Autobahn, even though you're doing a buck-twenty, you need to pass very quickly because someone else might be doing two bucks.

[WRW]

Your 80-25 mph differential is 55 mph. Are you saying that that is the normal speed difference between passing cars? Are you saying that driving with even 20 mph differential is a good idea, given that you've observed that some other drivers will act in an unpredictable manner? Or given that the forward view will always give a better and more accurate picture of the overall flow of traffic than a small mirrored image?

I drive with the specific intention of avoiding your scenario whether passing or being passed, and I seldom have to lightly brake. If you wish to put yourself in those situations, knowing the unpredictability of other drivers, MOPAR to ya'.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

Your 80-25 mph differential is 55 mph. Are you saying that that is the normal speed difference between passing cars? Are you saying that driving with even 20 mph differential is a good idea, given that you've observed that some other drivers will act in an unpredictable manner? Or given that the forward view will always give a better and more accurate picture of the overall flow of traffic than a small mirrored image?

Re-read what I posted, I think you have lost the thread a bit. I said the situation was similar, as in that the driver who passes without adequately determining if they can do so safely is just like one who merges on a highway without also doing the same. Both are not paying enough attention to the traffic behind them. The speeds were just an illustration of unsafe highway merging, not a recommendation.

I drive with the specific intention of avoiding your scenario whether passing or being passed, and I seldom have to lightly brake. If you wish to put yourself in those situations, knowing the unpredictability of other drivers, MOPAR to ya'.

That's the idea. Don't put yourself in the situation in the first place. It's the correct way to handle the situation, but also why my answer to wsDormin wasn't liked. The left lane is for passing, but just because you're passing doesn't magically make you in the right or devoid of responsibility. FYI, the situation was wsDormins, I replied that the initial passing driver has the responsibility to also keep track of traffic behind them and only pass when clear. We're agreeing.


The thread of thought is:
The hypothetical situation that wsDormin posted is an example of likely not paying enough attention to traffic behind as well as in front. I replied to it as such, wsDormin didn't like it, you questioned why the situation required other drivers to take evasive action (since those words were not used by wsDormin, but are implied by the situation as described), I elaborated on the situation to illustrate why that was the case (and referenced another case where the same lack of attention is demonstrated)...I believe you then mis-read that to be an argument for the habit rather than a continuation of what the habit is bad.

[WRW]

OK. We agree in most part, I just seldom see where dormin's description of action requires braking, especially hard braking, when reasonable speed differential and following distance are involved. Most times, engine back-pressure will slow adequately to avoid evasive actions.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

(1) If you are in the left lane and exceeding the posted limit while overtaking a vehicle in the right lane and some dipsh!t runs up on your bumpoer and starts gesticulating and blowing his horn, are you violating the law if you don't slow down, change lanes, and let him go by?

Since the scenario was lost, here's a re-quote.

The fact that dorminWS is speeding or at the limit of what he considers safe is irrelevant. The speed isn't the issue, it's the planning and management of passing that create the scenario regardless of speed (even if both drivers are not speeding, it's still true).

The fact that another car was able to run on dorminWS during his pass indicates that this other driver was traveling sufficiently fast that dorminWS should have noticed this when evaluating traffic behind him, while planning his passing opportunity. Good options are either decide to pass faster or waited until this other driver has already passed dorminWS. It's simply not wise to pull out in front of a faster moving vehicle and that's the main point. Assuming that you can pass because no-one is beside you and your traveling "as fast as you want to go," isn't wise.

The obvious exception here would be if the car behind is a "land shark." I.e. weaving in and out of lanes erratically and typically at much higher rates of speed than traffic. Even a great driver can get caught in dorminWS's scenario despite executing the pass properly.


The key here is to recognize why the scenario occurred and fix it. It's not a beat down on the mistake because we all make mistakes. The better driver recognizes that when caught in that situation, they were the one who mistakenly planned and executed a pass when they shouldn't have. Fix your pass planning and it will be safer for everyone.

My personal opinion on why this occurs (my mistakes included) is lack of driving far enough ahead. Most driving materials recommend some sort of three stage planning process. When people aren't planning that far ahead they don't recognize that they need to pass until they "need to pass right now" to avoid having to slow down. Sometimes it's a lack of visibility in traffic, but usually is driving only a second or two in front of the vehicle. That's your short range plan. Your intermediate plan should be more like 5-10 sec and you should be driving as far out as 20-30secs. If you only have a second or two to plan and execute a pass, you're not going to realize what traffic behind you is doing very well. Ideally you'd be keeping track of it anyways, but the reality of rearward visibility means that won't happen.

Don't get me started on how we teach drivers to set up their mirrors wrong in drivers ed!

[gunderwood]

OK. We agree in most part, I just seldom see where dormin's description of action requires braking, especially hard braking, when reasonable speed differential and following distance are involved. Most times, engine back-pressure will slow adequately to avoid evasive actions.

Understand. Creating engine back pressure requires changing your speed, which is an evasive action. Braking is merely a stronger evasive action. A good driver can typically manage that because they have good predictive models and sort of expected the other driver to pull out improperly.

Evasive action is taking action you would not have had to do because of another drivers actions...particular if NOT taking that action will likely result in an accident. Thus, if you have to engine brake to avoid hitting the other driver who pulled out in front of you, that's evasive action.

The flaw is in the first drivers passing planning, not in your engine braking or whatever. My suggestion to dorminWS was to fix the flawed passing plan...not get angry at the other guy who also wants to pass him.

Edit: I think we agree, it's just that you were hung up on my description of braking or hard braking as an illustration of evasive action. As you say, engine braking is also evasive action. So is changing lanes. Etc. I merely choose one way of describing the action the driver behind dorminWS may have had to perform.

[WRW]

See, I call engine braking a speed adjustment, not an evasive action. One might consider the very act of passing as an evasive action, though I would not.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[WRW]

I know you've seen drivers that will approach ar a speed more than 10 mph greater than your own, only to get within 10-20 feet of equal to your vehicle and then slow to pace you for the next mile or so. After having that happen any number of times, I have a hard time finding fault with anyone who, with some consideration for passing times and speed differences, goes ahead and passes.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

I know you've seen drivers that will approach ar a speed more than 10 mph greater than your own, only to get within 10-20 feet of equal to your vehicle and then slow to pace you for the next mile or so. After having that happen any number of times, I have a hard time finding fault with anyone who, with some consideration for passing times and speed differences, goes ahead and passes.

Understand that you may not have a problem with it, but it does cause accidents. You might mind a whole lot more if you where driving at 150MPH and that car starting passing at only 100MPH...like on the Autobahn. The point isn't that you mind, but rather that it's bad passing planning and while it may not get you in trouble most of the time on US highways...it can get you and others killed. The ideal solution is for the first passing car to have a better passing plan and consider what traffic may overtake them while passing.

Back to the original scenario, if you find yourself in that situation where you're passing and "suddenly" someone is behind you wanting to go faster, the best plan of action is speed up and complete the pass quicker. Don't slow down to get back over.

Edit: As for the car pacing you at 10-20ft, that driver shouldn't be doing that either. More importantly, two wrongs (pacing at 10-20ft and executing an improper pass that doesn't consider faster traffic behind you) doesn't make a right. Just because someone does something stupid on the road doesn't mean you can retaliate as well. IMHO, I want to get away from the driver doing something stupid as quickly as possible. Let them endanger their own life, not mine.

[WRW]

I did say that some consideration should be given. Your example on the Autobahn would not be giving consideration. Further,the rules of the Autobahn get you nothing on I95 or I81 (though I wish they did).

And yes, I did state in an earlier post that I do speed up finding another car behind me moving at a faster pace...and did get pulled over for it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[gunderwood]

I did say that some consideration should be given. Your example on the Autobahn would not be giving consideration. Further,the rules of the Autobahn get you nothing on I95 or I81 (though I wish they did).

Remember, we are discussing this scenario because dorminWS proposed it. The initial passing driver didn't give consideration because the other driver was flashing their lights, etc.

Other than the speed limits, the rules of driving are not really different here than the Autobahn (the Autobahn isn't some mythical road, but rather a system of highways. It's exactly what we have as an Interstate system). The difference is that they are much stricter about enforcing these rules (such as left lane for passing only, passing quickly and only if you can make it cleanly and not cause other drivers to have to slow down, etc.) because the consequences of an accident at very high speeds is extreme. Their system, even corrected for all the usual traffic density, miles traveled, etc. is twice as safe as ours. The reason is simple. They are taught and learn very quickly, or penalized harshly for endangering others via bad driving...such as the scenario dorminWS proposed.

Unlike the Germans, instead of blaming bad drivers and bad driving behavior in the USA, we blame speed. The Germans and their Autobahn are merely one example that most people are aware of, but there are other high speed roads in the world.

I acknowledge people do it, but just because they do doesn't make it right. It's still dangerous and it's still a lack of basic awareness.

And yes, I did state in an earlier post that I do speed up finding another car behind me moving at a faster pace...and did get pulled over for it.

Which is what I recommended dorminWS do when in such a scenario. It's the correct thing to do. It's good that you do so, but dorminWS basically said he would not.

[WRW]

Originally posted by dorminWS
"(1) If you are in the left lane and exceeding the posted limit while overtaking a vehicle in the right lane and some dipsh!t runs up on your bumpoer and starts gesticulating and blowing his horn, are you violating the law if you don't slow down, change lanes, and let him go by?"

You are right, gunderwood, I just have a hard time recommending risking a ticket. That wasn't the question. The law was already being violated by exceeding the posted speed.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]