right of way at a mini roundabout

I was able to have a closer look today and I think it was as Robin suggested.

A high street going N/S and originally a side road going off to the West (T junction) that has been converted into a mini-roundabout junction.

When entering the junction from the high road from the North you are presented with a roundabout symbol along with a Give Way sign, twin broken lines at the mouth of the entry [Give way to traffic on major road (can also be used at mini roundabouts)] and white triangle in the road. The other two junctions had wide single broken white lines [Give way to traffic from the right at a mini-roundabout] (as wide as the double) and only the roundabout sign (no give way sign or white triangle in the road).

Cheers, T i m

It is just that the way it is promoted in the UK reinforces "give way to the right" when the reality is that people on the right approaching the roundabout have no such right. We still have such people here with road rage occurring often. The reality is,whether we agree or not, first in has the right of way and anyone on the right that has not entered has not.

oops!

What if you are entering the mini roundabout across double broken white lines and past a sign saying 'Give way' when the road entering to the right of that one onto the same mini roundabout has no 'Give way' signs and a single broken white line?

Not sure how that would wear at the roundabout I mentioned above (and many like it round here)?

Cheers, T i m

I think if you asked people, the majority would think that they had absolute priority over any traffic that is on their left at a roundabout, so that if someone pulled out from the left, any collision would be that person's fault. It's certainly what I was taught in my normal test in 1981 and my IAM advanced test in 1992. There was no mention of "you do not have priority over anyone else until you cross your give way line".

Cars on your left are still allowed to pull out ahead of you, as they are when they are on a minor road that meets a major road at a cross roads or T junction, as long as they make sure that they have cleared your path before you would collide with them - but as before, they are liable if they misjudge.

For roundabouts, the distinction between absolute priority and priority once you are on the roundabout is insignificant for a full size roundabout because of the large gap between their give way line and your position when you pull out, but for a mini-roundabout, there is often less than a car length between the two, so the decision as to whether you can safely pull out has to be taken *before* the other car reaches his line.

It is still the same. The double broken lines and sign are only to make it clearer where due to road layout, you might think on the approach that the road went straight through and not bother to slow.

Some people get worked up about it if two cars pull forward at the same time, but each has equal right to do so, until one is actually on the roundabout. They are also equally obliged to take avoiding action and so practically, the one heading for the side of the other has to brake.

SteveW

Ok, that makes sense.

It didn't happen the other night when one car lost it's entire front (all the plastic stuff). I think it was a car going South (though the giveway stuff) and turning right at the roundabout (down the side road) hit a car heading North who didn't stop in time on the roundabout.

I am very careful there because you often lose sight of these modern white lensed indicators when the sun is shining on them. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

At a 5-way, still pretty small, somewhere behind Ealing Town Hall, I was indicating right, since that was where I was going, and started to steer my way around the central blob, which meant moving to my left first. The driver of the vehicle facing me was clearly so unused to the concept of driving around the centre, that he assumed that, despite my signal, I was actually heading left, so he set off across the centre. He seemed quite taken aback when I continued on my intended track, braking sharply as I saw what he was doing.

Chris

Other way round! The guy in the most expensive car will be a rich bas**rd :-)

Indeed. They fail so badly at their function in such circumstances that I'm surprised they are not banned.

#Paul

I really don't understand why the UK's "Construction and Use" regulations (and similar rules in other countries) allow white-lensed orange-bulbed indicators, and allow indicators to be placed within the headlamp housing at the front or right next to brake lights at the back. I can remember cars of the 1960s and 70s where the indicators and sidelights at the front were placed a foot away from the headlights, sometimes within or even underneath the bumper so they could be *seen*. Likewise for rear lights where typically the brake/tail and indicator lights would be separated by the reflector so the indicators were still visible when the brake lights were on.

I am always more cautious with certain makes of car (I think one mark of VW Golf was an offender) which have the indicator in the centre of a circular ring of brake light, which makes it almost impossible to see the indicator during the day when the car is braking. And at night, when a car has its dipped headlights on, I often stop at junctions where I would otherwise have been able to keep going, because I cannot be sure whether the car is indicating.

We have to make a similar manoeuvre when turning into my Mums house back alleyway. When approaching it from the South it's a pretty tight turn (walls both sides) so you have to go out to the middle of the road (still inside the white line) to get a reasonable angle on it. Even when approaching it slowly (in the hope it sends a message to those behind) and indicating left, we have still had people (especially motorcycles etc) trying to come up the inside? ;-(

I guess there being a road on the right just ahead may help to confuse those behind.

Re the indicators, whereas when we had (yellow lensed) indicators that were there for that reason, (not trying to be blended in the general trim) you could look ahead and still 'see' the indicators in your peripheral vision, today I find myself *only* looking at the indicators of an approaching vehicle (especially at a mini roundabout) to make sure I don't miss it. ;-(

Even the Mrs (passenger) will often confirm 'It's coming round', just in case I haven't seen it.

Progress?

Cheers, T i m

Quite ... we seem to have lost the plot when it comes to form over function, especially when it comes to indicators.

In the old days, a white lamp behind a yellow and often fresnelled lens meant the whole thing lit up yellow making it easy to see under any lighting conditions.

The painted yellow lamp behind a clear lens doesn't work as well in many cases / conditions.

LED indicators can be ok but again, don't seem to have the power in the sunlight, and can be too bight when in your face at traffic lights at night.

Some of those that scan along, rather than flash are 'ok' but often not as obvious as the straight 'on/off' solution (and again, I end up looking at them, rather than *just* considering their meaning).

The only improvements are the indicator repeaters built into the front of door mirrors ... similar in style and location to the origional 'Traficators' in fact!

Cheers, T i m

Agreed. Good observations.

Form over function to be sure. Similar to the 'craze' of tinted lenses of a while back.

Yup. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

Mine uses yellow lamps, inside a yellow plastic lens only slightly larger than the lamp, with the whole lot in a clear lens. They seem to work well.

The brakes lights similarly use red, red, clear.

I find that the biggest problem is small indicators built into the middle of circular rear light clusters - they often become very difficult to see when the brake lights come on right around them - and similar small indicators, very close to (or even within the same lens) as the dipped headlights.

Give it a few more years and we'll be back to hand signals and men with red flags.

SteveW

The requirement is simply for the colour of light emitted, the colour of the lens is not specified. It is perfectly possible to have white lensed indicators that are just as effective as old style ones.

The construction and uses regulations cannot overrule the design of type approved vehicles. Not only do we have to accept any vehicle approved by any other EU country, but we must also accept non-EU countries designs where they are deemed "equivalent."

Both of those annoy me regularly.

I remember when mk2 Sierras were common and they were wired in two different ways - some had the tail and brake lights combined and with a pair of separate fog lights, while others (mine included) had tail and fog lights combined and a pair of separate brake lights. I always thought the latter far superior for immediate visibility and a good example of how a little thought can vastly improve the practicality. Why designers now think it is sensible to put indicators in the middle of circular brake lights or close to (or even within) the lens of headlights, I don't know.

SteveW

I saw that in a BMW Mini earlier.

If like the Mini then I'd agree. The reason is the lens does all the work, the outer lens should make little difference.

Ok.

Agreed.

With EV's being naturally quiet it might not be a bad idea and the hand signals save electric. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

No. It's a shame that the Construction and Use regulations are so toothless that they don't legislate about this, in the way that the US safety rules were very strict about headlights on imported vehicles, requiring cars such as the E Type Jag to be re-designed for US market (and that design then became the worldwide standard).

Indicators (and any other lights) need to be seen and clearly distinguished from everything else - that is their purpose. All other considerations, such as design and the modern trend of orange bulbs with clear lenses, must take a back seat compared with the actual function of them.

I've not actually seen any cars with combined tail and fog lights, with separate brake lights, but I too have often thought that it would be a better design, since the tail and fog lights do the same job of defining the presence and width of a vehicle - in dark-but-clear and in foggy conditions respectively.

I wish the C&U regs also mandated that fog lights must be paired, just like tail lights are, and dictated that one fog light on the off side is not sufficient because it does not define the vehicle's width and therefore allow you to judge your approximate distance from the vehicle in front.

All my previous cars (Renault 5s, VW Golfs, Peugeot 306s) came with two fog light bulb holders but with a bulb only in the offside holder, so it was dead easy to fit an extra bulb to make sure my fog lamps were paired. Sadly my present car (Peugeot 308) comes with one holder on the offside for the foglight and one holder on the nearside for the reversing light, instead of two of each. Reversing into a drive between gateposts or hedges at night is very difficult when only the nearside is illuminated: I find I have to dab the brakes periodically as I am reversing to illuminate the offside gatepost/hedge with a bit of light, albeit red light, so I can see it to avoid it.

and so the first one to move then gets priority and everything unclogs smoothly.