OT - Drivers

Apr 07, 2021 Last reply: 5 years ago 118 Replies
Saved reading

There was a sad case in the USA some years ago where a railway ran parallel and close to a road which had traffic lights to control access from a side road over a level crossing on the railway. Vehicles were queued on the side road at the traffic lights and backed up as far as the level crossing. A bus (I think it may have been a school bus) stopped *on* the crossing. And the lights started to flash because a train was coming...

The TV programme I saw which analysed this crash mentioned that city authorities looked as ways of integrating the level crossing with the traffic lights, so that when a train was due, traffic on the side road got a green light which cleared the queue and prevented it backing up on the level crossing. They completely missed the point that all level crossings should be treated as what we in the UK call box junctions: do not enter unless there is sufficient space on the far side to accommodate your vehicle. It sounded as if in the USA, the concept of not stopping *on* a level crossing was somewhat alien to them ;-)

Box junctions at side junctions work well, apart from one little flaw: you can be on the major road, with traffic from a side road on the left obliged to give way to you. And you stop at the box junction. As soon as the traffic ahead moves, a car on the side road turns left and occupies the space. And then another one does when the traffic moves again. And you on the major road are stuck there like a lemon, never able to go because no-one on the side road gives you the priority that the HC rules decree. Without the box junction, you'd be right behind the car ahead, and the side-road car would not be able to get out - unless you *allowed* it, as courtesy suggests should happen *occasionally* (as opposed to every time, as a defined right). But this would block oncoming traffic which wants to turn right into the side road and is why the box junction is there. It could be solved by the box junction only covering the patch of main road that right-turners need to turn into the side road, whereas often it covers the whole width of road in front of the side road, including the bit used by side road traffic turning left.

That is more a London procedure when you're fed up with waiting at a junction. The usual technique was to either wait for a brand new car or a taxi. Taxis will always back off and prevent an accident if they can.

<snip>

The actual rule is you may not enter the box if the exit is blocked by stationary traffic. Once the traffic starts moving you may enter the box. Stopping in the box because the traffic in front has subsequently stopped is not an offence.

That is because they cannot 'ply for hire' if the vehicle has body damage.

True, but is it legal to start off the instant the car on the far side has started (hoping that they will move far enough that there will be space for you on the far side) and then stop because a car on the side road has started as well and got there first because they are closer? That's where traffic light cameras and/or dashcam come into their own to support your story.

Even without the side-road queue-jumping issue, what's the legality about stopping on the box because you have misjudged how far the car in front will move before stopping again? Are you expected to wait until the gap is proved to be long enough to accommodate your car, rather than just hoping that it will be? A bit of a grey area, and maybe one where good driving practice and the letter of the HC differ.

A lot depends on where the box junction is: if you are overhanging at traffic lights, the car from your left that you are blocking will be starting from rest. You may get verbal and horn abuse, but it's not a safety issue unless he fails to stop to avoid you. At a level crossing, where the vehicle that you are blocking will be a train that is already moving (maybe very fast!) it's a very different story ;-)

I didn't know that. How strictly is it applied? Is it *any* scratch or scuff, or is there a minimum amount of dent that is allowed before the rule kicks in? Is the taxi driver expected to "evict" his passenger immediately the damage occurs, or is he allowed to continue the passenger's journey to the end, and *then* withdraw from service?

I imagine the fairly hefty "puking penalties" that taxi drivers may levy to a passenger who throws up in their car are to cover the time the car is off the road getting valeted, because I'm sure a similar rule will apply about not plying for hire if there's puke in the back of the car.

Ah, well, it wasn't blocked when (daughter in this case) set off across the junction in her van.

What about going for a suitably size space beyond the box that becomes filled by someone driving irresponsibly (pulling out in front of you and claiming the space')? ;-(

Unless they also store (and consider) the video footage that led up to her being stationary in the box (and I know they can / do with some cameras), all they might see is her sat mostly in the box area?

Cheers, T i m

<snip>

That's sorta what happened other than the traffic ahead didn't all move off as such but shuffled up enough for her to then be able to fit the fan in clear of the box.

Yes, pulling in front of a vehicle on the main road.

I guess that depends on what the rules or more importantly exceptions are.

I thought you weren't supposed to enter the box unless you could exit it cleanly? That doesn't seem to be what Scion is stating though.

Yes, if 'fairness' came into it then I predict most people would suggest that daughter getting a ticket wasn't.

Quite.

In this case the junction on the left is no right turn on the way out so even if you blocked the mouth of that lane you wouldn't be obstructing anyone. People wanting to exit and turn left couldn't if there was nowhere to go etc.

Cheers, T i m

Ah but what about the tailgaters on downhill stretches of isy roads, do they have a death wish or are they relying on the person ahead to stop them. Lucky I don't drive, and even luckier I cannot see this behaviour any more. Brian

I know this has come up before (in other NGs), but in fact, are these "SUVs" really any bigger (wider / longer) in footprint than very ordinary cars from makers such as Skoda, Peugeot, Citroen, Vauxhall and Ford?

Quite simply - in a queue of traffic the cars should be like wagons on a train. They close up when stationery and spread out when moving - But above all stay in the same order unless exceptional circumstances.

How should they behave when they are in fact paperclips, instead?

The Natural Philosopher snipped-for-privacy@invalid.invalid wrote in news:s4p5hn$g2u$3 @dont-email.me:

Ahhhh! Well spotted - I am usually careful of that one!Of course I meant "stationary"

Amazing how many people like driving something the size of a van.

We have had a number of Kugas over the years and these are based on the same chassis as the Ford Focus and as such no longer or wider just taller which is the main reason we went for one in the first place. The first one we went for was going to be just a two wheel drive but due to an offer from the main agent we ended up with a 4WD. Subsequent ones were all 4WD mainly for better cornering and the occasional snowy day we get here in the Pennines. I have only been off road on a few occasions if you can call it that when parking in a field for some festival or show. Present one is a PHEV and as such is a mere front wheel drive automatic. I like SUVs and since changing to one have never suffered the back ache I got driving a Mondeo and getting in and out is a cinch compared to saloons.

Richard

"Rod Speed" snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news:idblr2F4s2iU1 @mid.individual.net:

Imangine elastic couplings!!

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required