Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 3,748
Is it not equally dangerous to come to a full stop on the motorway just to let the driver out
You seem to be holding the lorry driver at fault despite him having the right of way.Motorway merge fail??
- Thread starter Orionaut
- Start date
Is it not equally dangerous to come to a full stop on the motorway just to let the driver out
You seem to be holding the lorry driver at fault despite him having the right of way.
I do kind of agree.
Indecisiveness is certainly one of the main causes of accidents
However!
The truck driver failed to leave a reasonable gap between him and the traffic in-front knowing that he was approaching a situation where there were both roadworks (And confusion) and joining traffic from slip roads.
If you are driving any vehicle, (Let alone a 40 ton one) you do have a degree of responsibility to allow yourself room to be able to mitigate the consequences of other peoples errors.
If you fail to do so, you fail the competence test!
IMO, this truck driver failed!
Not great driving by either party but I get the feeling the lorry driver had in the back of his mind that it was possibly the lesser dangerous way to continue rather than making a sudden maneuver that could have resulted in a much more dangerous situation.
Is it not equally dangerous to come to a full stop on the motorway just to let the driver out
He didn't have to come to a full stop, the focus wasn't travelling particularly slowly. He just baulked (Perhaps wrongly, Once I commit to go, I go!) at pulling into a tiny gap that really should have been bigger. had the truck driver been driving more resposibly the situation wouldnt have arisen
He shouldn't have got anywhere near that situation
His (The truck driver) error was being too close to the vehicle in front as he approached the junction.
This could have been corrected several hundred meters back from the junction.
He just chose not to do so!
And that is why I think he was in the wrong!
The Focus was in a position to get in front of the lorry and failed to do so in good time, but I don't think the lorry is completely blameless either.
At one point where the Focus is alongside the lorry's speed at the bottom is 31mph, then it speeds up to 34 mph fairly quickly.
The Focus should have already been in the lane by that point, but the lorry wasn't exactly considerate.
At one point where the Focus is alongside the lorry's speed at the bottom is 31mph, then it speeds up to 34 mph fairly quickly.
The Focus should have already been in the lane by that point, but the lorry wasn't exactly considerate.
Yes, But merging is essentially a cooperative exercise
L1 traffic needs to leave gaps for joining traffic to merge with even though they have "Right of way"
This driver clearly didn't!
He approached a roadwork junction with a "Gap" of less then a second between him and the vehicle in front!
Where the **** did he expect the joining traffic to go???
By the time the joining vehicle driver realised he couldn't join there was nowhere else he could go! (Cones to the left)
Camera driver was in the wrong! I would never put myself in that position!
The road had heavy traffic on it, you expect the truck driver to just leap out of the way for that tool in the red car? He made a bad judgment call and he paid for it. The lorry driver didn't have to let him out at all.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 1,468
As said car driver totally at fault vehicles don't have to let them in they have to either get a gap or wait.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 2,951
There seems to be a strong misunderstanding of the term right of way from the OP, the truck driver didn't have to do anything in fact he could have quite easily have sped up and closed the gap and still have been in the right.
The problem comes with people like yourself who don't actually know how stuff like merging works and assumes a courtesy is a fact.
The problem comes with people like yourself who don't actually know how stuff like merging works and assumes a courtesy is a fact.
Car in the wrong although the truck driver wasn't using anticipation nor defensive driving.
IMO, as a class 1 HGV driver, he should have read the situation and realised what the non professional driver was about to do.
He didn't, the car lost.
Both could have acted differently to avoid the situation but, ultimately, a classic case of a car driver thinking he can barge his way out when in fact the other traffic, truck or not, has right of way.
IMO, as a class 1 HGV driver, he should have read the situation and realised what the non professional driver was about to do.
He didn't, the car lost.
Both could have acted differently to avoid the situation but, ultimately, a classic case of a car driver thinking he can barge his way out when in fact the other traffic, truck or not, has right of way.
First rule of driving, be a ghost to other drivers, never force someone else to change speed or direction of you are joining a road they are on.
No way in hell is the truck driver to blame.
Blaming the truck is like punching someone in the head, but claiming they headbutted your fist.
No way in hell is the truck driver to blame.
Blaming the truck is like punching someone in the head, but claiming they headbutted your fist.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
The benefit of being a ghost is the incorporeal translucency that allows them to pass through solid objects. A car doesn't have that luxury. As a driver, and 10 years no claims bonus (the same amount of time i have been driving), it is my duty to always anticipate the mistakes of others. Right of way and the highway code are autistic to the application of common sense.
The conditions were already difficult because of the road works. The lorry driver was a *** and made it hard for the car. Pay close attention to the speed indicator. The traffic slowed to 31MPH at the merge. At the point the red car wants to come in, the lorry actively aggressively accelerates up to 34MPH. Using the lorry's wiper as a yard stick, you can see he closes the gap between himself and the car in front. The red car fails to adjust but the lorry doesn't help the situation either.
Treat others as you would hope to be treated. We are all human, we all make mistakes. Give somebody else the grace and maybe next time you mess it up you won't suffer.
Last edited:
And you would be willing to willfully risk killing somebody because you had it??
This was a very easy accident to avoid!
The truck driver chose not to do so!
He should not be driving at all, let alone a truck!
That's not what I said. Please don't misrepresent my words. Personally I would have eased off and let the car in. But what I said was that the lorry driver had right of way. The lorry driver chose not to let the car in, as he was entitled to do. Therefore the fault lays with the car driver.
Last edited:
No idea why people are saying the lorry driver was to blame. It quite clearly states:
Edit: Also - the Focus driver most likely does what everyone does when they are merging/pulling out of junctions and they see an HGV there - they try and get in front whatever the costs.
Lots of people are saying "the HGV driver should have backed off". The same could be said for the Focus driver.
Edit: Also - the Focus driver most likely does what everyone does when they are merging/pulling out of junctions and they see an HGV there - they try and get in front whatever the costs.
Lots of people are saying "the HGV driver should have backed off". The same could be said for the Focus driver.
Even if the lorry driver had let the car in, the lorry driver would have had to slow down to maintain a safe gap between them.
When driving, your actions should not cause other road users to slow, stop or swerve. In this instance the car driver seemed adamant on causing another road user to slow down or possibly even swerve so as to avoid them.
On the whole, I agree with the lorry driver. He was completely in the right, no matter which way you look at the video. It's fine to say that through sheer courtesy he should have let the car driver in - but the car driver should not expect other road users to slow down and let them in through their inability to drive.
When driving, your actions should not cause other road users to slow, stop or swerve. In this instance the car driver seemed adamant on causing another road user to slow down or possibly even swerve so as to avoid them.
On the whole, I agree with the lorry driver. He was completely in the right, no matter which way you look at the video. It's fine to say that through sheer courtesy he should have let the car driver in - but the car driver should not expect other road users to slow down and let them in through their inability to drive.
I see what Orionaut is getting at.
A small amount of cooperation from the LGV would have seen the red car successfully join the carriageway with no further incident.
It looks like he decided to just hang the red car out to dry by accelerating into small gap he'd left when the red car didn't instantly fill it.
People can bang on about "right of way" all they like, but the Highway code is quite specific about this.
Right at the start of the Highway Code:
1. Overview
This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident. (my emphasis there)
LGV could have given way and helped avoid the incident - he had more opportunity to do so than the car (unless there was a bloody great gap behind the LGV - in which case the car should have dropped behind!)
EDIT - Some time ago I attended a Driver Alertness workshop, and the exact same message was preached there - in fact we were shown a diagram of an incident very similar to this and asked "who's fault is it?" - Everyone except me said the car, as it was the LGV's right of way. I said it was the fault of everyone involved, because they all had an opportunity to do something to prevent an incident. Guess who was right?
FWIW my driving instructor also preached the same thing. If you can do something to avoid an incident, you should.
A small amount of cooperation from the LGV would have seen the red car successfully join the carriageway with no further incident.
It looks like he decided to just hang the red car out to dry by accelerating into small gap he'd left when the red car didn't instantly fill it.
People can bang on about "right of way" all they like, but the Highway code is quite specific about this.
Right at the start of the Highway Code:
1. Overview
This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident. (my emphasis there)
LGV could have given way and helped avoid the incident - he had more opportunity to do so than the car (unless there was a bloody great gap behind the LGV - in which case the car should have dropped behind!)
EDIT - Some time ago I attended a Driver Alertness workshop, and the exact same message was preached there - in fact we were shown a diagram of an incident very similar to this and asked "who's fault is it?" - Everyone except me said the car, as it was the LGV's right of way. I said it was the fault of everyone involved, because they all had an opportunity to do something to prevent an incident. Guess who was right?
FWIW my driving instructor also preached the same thing. If you can do something to avoid an incident, you should.
Last edited: