Slightly changing the subject, anyone know why someone would drive down an empty and unlit NSL road at 40 - 45mph on dipped beams? Then following on from this, any idea why they miraculously find the main beam switch once you move out and turn the mains no to have a look, then go past them?

Chris

Possibly annoyance at having been dazzled via their door mirror, and having their night vision destroyed?

Possibly annoyance at having been dazzled via their door mirror, and having their night vision destroyed?

Maybe, maybe just annoyed at being woken up? If they were interested in seeing what was going on down the road, they should have used their mains;)

Chris

Only problem with this is that it's often interpreted as aggression :(

Could be, but to be honest, I really don't give too much concern for the sensibilities of the inconsiderate.

And yes! I'm constantly amazed by people driving along without being able to see further down the road Makes overtaking interesting too as it's a fine balance between dazzling them and seeing where the road goes!

It is most often impossible to move out and see past them without dazzling them I find. Again, if they cannot be bothered to drive in a considerate manner, I don't feel too guilty about giving them a bit of a wake up call.

Chris

The very reason for the mains on and keep em on approach.

Slightly changing the subject, anyone know why someone would drive down an empty and unlit NSL road at 40 - 45mph on dipped beams? Then following on from this, any idea why they miraculously find the main beam switch once you move out and turn the mains no to have a look, then go past them?

Chris

a) Basic incompetence and/or lack of consideration.

Lack of consideration.

I wish the **** in a Saab that came close to hitting me tonight had read all this. Mind, he probably couldn't read.

Was coming the other way, overtaking, just making it before bollards, swerving wildly out just after bollard to overtake the next car. Did this twice on a 40mph limit road in the space of probably 200 yards - he must have been doing 60 to 70 !

I'm sure we've had this before, but imho, not using your main beams just so that others can overtake you, is not being inconsiderate, it's just driving as you prefer to do. There's no rule, guidance or other text in the HC that says you must use main beams for the benefit of impatient drivers behind, however much you may think there should be. Even if it were the case, lack of planning or consideration on their part is no excuse for lack of courtesy on ours, or we are just returning to the jungle.

I'm sure we've had this before, but imho, not using your main beams just so that others can overtake you, is not being inconsiderate, it's just driving as you prefer to do. There's no rule, guidance or other text in the HC that says you must use main beams for the benefit of impatient drivers behind, however much you may think there should be. Even if it were the case, lack of planning or consideration on their part is no excuse for lack of courtesy on ours, or we are just returning to the jungle.

Hi Nick

In so many areas of life, we are often in a situation where we would prefer to just do our own thing. However, driving is an area where certain rules apply (the highway code) and a degree of common sense must apply also. Driving along an unlighted road on dipped beams is completely legal. It infers as much by omission in the Highway Code.

However, if you take this as an OK to drive on dipped beams when main beams are appropriate, you may as well use omission to determine a few other "unwritten" rules. How about it being OK to chase pedestrians along the verge in a rural area? Where does the HC prohibit that?

Driving along unlighted roads on dipped beam is dangerous, regardless of other traffic's intentions. That a driver is so out of touch with the reality of the task at hand that they would find it acceptable would indicate they were unfit to drive IMO.

When overtaking these people we are exposed to an unnecessarily increased risk, which we may mitigate by use of the main beam to explore the road ahead of them.

This is not a return to the jungle attitude, rather it is an effect of the expectations of different groups of road users. On the one hand we have the "good" drivers with an adequate degree of awareness who wish to make adequate progress within the bounds of the conditions and the legal requirements, then there are the "bad" drivers who wish to use the road at whatever speed they feel comfortable with, using inadequate lighting due usually to absence of mind. And before anyone says "ahh but we don't HAVE to go fast", let me just remind you that the folks guilty of this sort of thing are usually the ones doing 45mph on the NSL road and in the 30mph limit road. I followed a guy the other night who was on dipped beam peaking at barely 30mph in a rural NSL road. As we came into a 30mph limit with street lights, he speeded up to maybe 45mph:rolleyes:

That we have a choice to do something wrong does not justify doing it.

Chris

I repeat, it's an inconvenience to you, maybe, but not "wrong". You just choose to label it as such, because you would like them to behave differently.

If dipped beams are inadequate illumination, how come we are legally obliged to use them when driving in traffic? Perhaps we should stop, until we can turn the main beams on again?

Being a "good" driver is not always about overtaking everything in sight. Sometimes it's about showing courtesy and restraint, also.

You, of course, are a "good" driver. You must be, you told us.

I repeat, it's an inconvenience to you, maybe, but not "wrong". You just choose to label it as such, because you would like them to behave differently.

Surely it is the responsibility of all drivers to travel in a manner that does not unnecessarily inconvenience others?

If dipped beams are inadequate illumination, how come we are legally obliged to use them when driving in traffic? Perhaps we should stop, until we can turn the main beams on again?

Are you saying that dipped beams are adequate illumination on a very dark average A road at night with no vehicles in front of you? We are talking about appropriate use here.

Being a "good" driver is not always about overtaking everything in sight. Sometimes it's about showing courtesy and restraint, also.

Perhaps the courtesy to put your main beams on where appropriate so that following vehicles can see past to pass? Or perhaps putting them on so you can see well enough to travel at a more appropriate speed for the conditions so people don't need to pass?

You, of course, are a "good" driver. You must be, you told us.

I try to be most of the time:angel: Unlike many who really don't think about their effect on other road users at all.

Chris

Well we'll have to agree to disagree - although I think the difference is pretty marginal :P

I think the big problem is as a responsible driver you have to overlook inconsiderate behaviour and simply deal with them as any other hazard. If an overtake wasn't on (because the other driver was not using main beam to light the road ahead), then I'd hold back and show restraint - startling a driver with my main beam is likely to produce unpredictable results which may compromise both safety and progress.

Chris

I think the big problem is as a responsible driver you have to overlook inconsiderate behaviour and simply deal with them as any other hazard. If an overtake wasn't on (because the other driver was not using main beam to light the road ahead), then I'd hold back and show restraint - startling a driver with my main beam is likely to produce unpredictable results which may compromise both safety and progress.

Chris

The routine is to move out as far as possible to get door their mirror as far off the axis of main beam as possible, light up the road ahead for a look, pause while they wake up and wait to see they are not doing anything daft, then nip past.

One has to weigh the potential hazard of overtaking against the potential hazard of creating a worse situation for the next driver to catch up with the mini jam. This driver will then possibly overtake you creating a higher hazard level for you than the slightly "firm" overtake would have created. Obviously it would not be good to sweep up behind someone and blast past at a huge speed difference with the mains on, but done carefully, the hazard level is low.

If it is at all risky looking, just hold back and wait is still the order of the day.

Chris

I'm sure we've had this before, but imho, not using your main beams just so that others can overtake you, is not being inconsiderate, it's just driving as you prefer to do. There's no rule, guidance or other text in the HC that says you must use main beams for the benefit of impatient drivers behind, however much you may think there should be. Even if it were the case, lack of planning or consideration on their part is no excuse for lack of courtesy on ours, or we are just returning to the jungle.

Maybe not, but you'll find plenty in the HC, and anything you care to read on "passing your UK driving test", "advanced driving", "race or rally driving" etc about "extending your vision". All of those sources clearly indicate that you should use full beam whenever it is safe and considerate to others to do so, irrespective of whether or not you are driving close to the ruling speed limit for the road. In this context you should note that you would fail a UK driving test were you not to drive close to all ruling speed limits on a quiet and reasonably straight road.

The key learning point for me when I took RoSPA lessing in 1999 was that I used to judge an overtake by asking "Can i get back on my side of the road in the available distance before the (corner, hill, or other obstruction which limited vision)"

Now I allow for something else travelling at a reasonable speed in the opposite direction suddenly reducing the available space mid-overtake.

For example - you see a corner in the distance. You may well judge that you can complete the overtake before the corner. This is all well and good if there's no traffic coming the other way. Something coming the other way when you are alongside the target vehicle can cut your available distance in half.

The net result is that I attempt far fewer overtakes these days (and I'm ten years older with kids :D"

As this thread has been bumped, Ill give my thoughts.

Having read the OP I can say that on roads like the A9 (mainly SC NSL, with some long straights and sweeping bends that still have decent visibility) i do what the OP suggests.

I will hold back from the car directly in front, check for gaps in between the traffic queue (as an escape plan if needed) and use either the right of the road or move over to the left to look if there is a left curve to the road. Once I have moved over (after indicating and all that) I will move as far right as I can. I do this for 2 reasons, to enable anyone wanting to follow me to have a chance seeing around me and to leave a bigger gap if someone I am overtaking decides to move out.

It frustrates me no end when I see a queue of traffic behind a HGV and they are all bunching up. They cant see the road ahead clearly enough, they cant build up speed quickly enough and stops other people overtaking cars 1 by 1.

Steve

i find they soon switch to main once you past them as they think they should be the lead car and anyone doing over 25mph are driving dangerously and need some blinding from their main beam for overtaking them.

The routine is to move out as far as possible to get door their mirror as far off the axis of main beam as possible, light up the road ahead for a look, pause while they wake up and wait to see they are not doing anything daft, then nip past.

One has to weigh the potential hazard of overtaking against the potential hazard of creating a worse situation for the next driver to catch up with the mini jam. This driver will then possibly overtake you creating a higher hazard level for you than the slightly "firm" overtake would have created. Obviously it would not be good to sweep up behind someone and blast past at a huge speed difference with the mains on, but done carefully, the hazard level is low.

If it is at all risky looking, just hold back and wait is still the order of the day.

Chris

However you shouldn't be moving out to the other side of the road to get a view. You move over to confirm that it is clear, before doing the overtake.

Its not always necessary to flash drivers as you are about to come past them, I usually only do it for tractors or HGV's, that way they know what your intentions are.

As for sitting back from the vehicle and then building up the speed, you lose too much time with that. You should close the gap to be in the overtake position, then when its clear, you move out, check confirm and then go. If you are too far away, by the time you're back into position, your oportunity to pass the driver may well have gone, you then need to rub all that speed off again safely.

If the overtake isn't on, then you drop back to the follow position and select another gear.

I had a superb overtake on my course driving to Morten on the Marsh, nice bit of road, clear view for quite some distance and did 6 cars in a row.

However you shouldn't be moving out to the other side of the road to get a view. You move over to confirm that it is clear, before doing the overtake.

Its not always necessary to flash drivers as you are about to come past them, I usually only do it for tractors or HGV's, that way they know what your intentions are.

As for sitting back from the vehicle and then building up the speed, you lose too much time with that. You should close the gap to be in the overtake position, then when its clear, you move out, check confirm and then go. If you are too far away, by the time you're back into position, your oportunity to pass the driver may well have gone, you then need to rub all that speed off again safely.

If the overtake isn't on, then you drop back to the follow position and select another gear.

I had a superb overtake on my course driving to Morten on the Marsh, nice bit of road, clear view for quite some distance and did 6 cars in a row.

The post was specifically referring to people driving along slowly on dipped beams when they should be on mains. You need to move out to an extent to check for oncoming traffic, then further out and onto main beams to check for unlit obstructions.

As for using a gap to build speed, this technique is perfectly valid if you get the planning done well (to avoid having to abort the attempt). Not all of us have decent power at our disposal, so taking a run up can be a good way to overtake safely.

Chris

The post was specifically referring to people driving along slowly on dipped beams when they should be on mains. You need to move out to an extent to check for oncoming traffic, then further out and onto main beams to check for unlit obstructions.

As for using a gap to build speed, this technique is perfectly valid if you get the planning done well (to avoid having to abort the attempt). Not all of us have decent power at our disposal, so taking a run up can be a good way to overtake safely.

Chris

Yes if it is planned and can be done in one swoop, then thats fine. The poster stated though, that they hang back which is different.

It depends what you mean by "hang back " though? I'd say I hold back if I have to off-side to set up a move, but that involves selecting my gear and moving out, but not accelerating, rather than necessarily being further off the car in front.

I was overtaken this morning in a very "advanced" fashion. A beautiful fog, you could see the headlights of oncoming traffic at a distance of 150 meters or so. I was happily rolling behind a Nissan King Cab with trailer, doing 45 mph (with a trailer he was allowed to do 50 mph, road's speed limit 55). Due to the fog the idea of trying to overtake was just absurd - to me, but not to the guy behind me.

With minimal margins he managed to return to his own lane before colliding. I almost wished he had hit something hard (such as a tractor with a fork lift, not uncommon on that road) - it would've been well-deserved.