On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 00:50:54 UTC+10, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

I guess the guy behind the wheels of the most expensive car gives way to the rest; common sense?!

wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 00:50:54 UTC+10, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

I guess the guy behind the wheels of the most expensive
car gives way to the rest; common sense?!

Not necessarily if he's rolling in it like Phil the Greek is.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:21:54 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Cant say I have ever noticed one here.

You are really lucky to have another driveling senile asshole to talk to and
who is obviously as senile as you are, eh, Rodent?

--
Richard addressing Rot Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:50:12 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


I guess the guy behind the wheels of the most expensive
car gives way to the rest; common sense?!

Not necessarily if he's rolling in it like Phil the Greek is.

Auto-contradicting senile asshole! LOL

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:

snip

All junctions have one stream that has priority and one or more streams that
must give way to that priority stream. according to standard rules. The
priorities are dependent on:

- priority to traffic on your right, on a roundabout

- priority to traffic that is on a major road (cross roads or T-junction
sign only), when on a minor road (give way signs and dash lines across the
road)

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Cheers, T i m

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:
I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Really? I can't say I've ever noticed that. I'll take your word for it if
you say you've checked ones that are local to you. I'll have a look when I
next encounter some mini-roundabouts.

If you were approaching a roundabout expecting to have priority over the car
on your left, would you notice the fact that the car on your left has two
dashed lines across his entry rather than your own one line? I wonder if a
clearer signpost is needed if the normal
"priority-from-the-right-at-roundabouts" rule is being changed to "this road
always has priority".

On 25/04/2019 10:08, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:

snip

All junctions have one stream that has priority and one or more streams that
must give way to that priority stream. according to standard rules. The
priorities are dependent on:

- priority to traffic on your right, on a roundabout

- priority to traffic that is on a major road (cross roads or T-junction
sign only), when on a minor road (give way signs and dash lines across the
road)

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

I didn't remember seeing that here, so I took a quick look at one local
one on streetview and there is no difference between the markings at
each entry.

Maybe some authorities do it differently. However, as that has never
been put into the Highway Code, drivers would not know to look out for
it or what it means.

SteveW

T i m wrote:

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

According to the traffic signs manual Chapter 5 (I haven't
checked if I have the latest issue)

"8.17 Where suitable deflection cannot be achieved, traffic
entering the roundabout might, because of its approach speed,
disregard the standard advisory Give Way line (diagram 1003.3).
In such cases, the mandatory GIVE WAY sign to diagram 602 may be
mounted on the same post and above the sign to diagram 611.1. The
GIVE WAY sign should not be used where it could confuse drivers
into giving way to traffic from the left as well as from the
right, e.g.on the stem of a T-junction or on any arm of a
four-way junction. When diagram 602 is used, it must be
accompanied by diagram 1023 and by the Give Way marking to
diagram 1003 (see figure 8-3)."

So, if I understand correctly, the roundabouts you have seen have
one road where they have deemed it likely that drivers may not
notice the roundabout with a single dotted line, so it gets the
double line and a "Give Way" sign on the same post as the
roundabout symbol.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

We in Australia do not have to give way to the right, the rule here is
give way to whoever is already in the round about.

On 25/04/2019 10:08, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:

snip

All junctions have one stream that has priority and one or more streams that
must give way to that priority stream. according to standard rules. The
priorities are dependent on:

- priority to traffic on your right, on a roundabout

- priority to traffic that is on a major road (cross roads or T-junction
sign only), when on a minor road (give way signs and dash lines across the
road)

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?


That is used in some cases but involves not just the double broken lines
but also the usual "Give Way" sign. And is far from the norm in my
experience. I've seen it used mainly at what was a T-junction to
increase the flow of traffic turning right from the joining road.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 25/04/2019 11:48, Chris J Dixon wrote:
T i m wrote:

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

According to the traffic signs manual Chapter 5 (I haven't
checked if I have the latest issue)

"8.17 Where suitable deflection cannot be achieved, traffic
entering the roundabout might, because of its approach speed,
disregard the standard advisory Give Way line (diagram 1003.3).
In such cases, the mandatory GIVE WAY sign to diagram 602 may be
mounted on the same post and above the sign to diagram 611.1. The
GIVE WAY sign should not be used where it could confuse drivers
into giving way to traffic from the left as well as from the
right, e.g.on the stem of a T-junction or on any arm of a
four-way junction. When diagram 602 is used, it must be
accompanied by diagram 1023 and by the Give Way marking to
diagram 1003 (see figure 8-3)."

So, if I understand correctly, the roundabouts you have seen have
one road where they have deemed it likely that drivers may not
notice the roundabout with a single dotted line, so it gets the
double line and a "Give Way" sign on the same post as the
roundabout symbol.


That's a better explanation than mine. Wish I'd seen it before posting.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 10:08:52 +0100, T i m wrote:

On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:

snip

All junctions have one stream that has priority and one or more streams that
must give way to that priority stream. according to standard rules. The
priorities are dependent on:

- priority to traffic on your right, on a roundabout

- priority to traffic that is on a major road (cross roads or T-junction
sign only), when on a minor road (give way signs and dash lines across the
road)

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

I have not seen this, but would the effect not be the opposite?
Generally, a double line is more restrictive than a single one.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:55:10 +0100, Robin wrote:

snip

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?


That is used in some cases but involves not just the double broken lines
but also the usual "Give Way" sign.

I'll have a look as I go past next. ;-)

It's similar to this:

https://d2f0ora2gkri0g.cloudfront.ne...7_image_8.jpeg

I don't actually remember seeing any 'Give way' signs but then I've
been walking / cycling / motorcycling / driving past that junction for
over 55 years so I know it's there and what it is. ;-)

And is far from the norm in my
experience.

Ok.

I've seen it used mainly at what was a T-junction to
increase the flow of traffic turning right from the joining road.

That could be the case in one instance but the other (right next to
it) was a new junction. There are others that were also as you say
('T' junctions) so that would also fit in.

Cheers, T i m

On 25/04/2019 11:48, Chris J Dixon wrote:
T i m wrote:

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

According to the traffic signs manual Chapter 5 (I haven't
checked if I have the latest issue)

"8.17 Where suitable deflection cannot be achieved, traffic
entering the roundabout might, because of its approach speed,
disregard the standard advisory Give Way line (diagram 1003.3).
In such cases, the mandatory GIVE WAY sign to diagram 602 may be
mounted on the same post and above the sign to diagram 611.1. The
GIVE WAY sign should not be used where it could confuse drivers
into giving way to traffic from the left as well as from the
right, e.g.on the stem of a T-junction or on any arm of a
four-way junction. When diagram 602 is used, it must be
accompanied by diagram 1023 and by the Give Way marking to
diagram 1003 (see figure 8-3)."

So, if I understand correctly, the roundabouts you have seen have
one road where they have deemed it likely that drivers may not
notice the roundabout with a single dotted line, so it gets the
double line and a "Give Way" sign on the same post as the
roundabout symbol.

Ah, makes sense. I've never noticed it so either we don't have any like
that around here (probably unlikely, although those we have are mainly
on slowish roads, with good visibility anyway) or (more likely), I've
just registered and obeyed the signage without really thinking about it
and noticing that it is different ... it's just another junction with or
without a give-way sign.

SteveW

On 25/04/2019 11:50, FMurtz wrote:
Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

We in Australia do not have to give way to the right, the rule here is
give way to whoever is already in the round about.

Which is the same in the UK. It *is* a form of priority to the right, as
the traffic coming around the roundabout is approaching from your right,
just not the same sort as some countries that drive on the right have!

SteveW

On 25/04/2019 10:52, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:
I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Really? I can't say I've ever noticed that. I'll take your word for it
if you say you've checked ones that are local to you. I'll have a look
when I next encounter some mini-roundabouts.

I have never seen one either.
I can find a few on google where google has stitched in a double line,
but its pretty obvious that it has.

Double line of course means give way to traffic in either direction.

While the single line, in theory, means give way from the left.
With the number of idiots that drive across mini islands that may not be
a good idea.

It is an offence to drive over a mini island as the spot in the middle
is a solid white line.

On 25/04/2019 11:48, Chris J Dixon wrote:
According to the traffic signs manual Chapter 5 (I haven't
checked if I have the latest issue)

"8.17 Where suitable deflection cannot be achieved, traffic
entering the roundabout might, because of its approach speed,
disregard the standard advisory Give Way line (diagram 1003.3).
In such cases, the mandatory GIVE WAY sign to diagram 602 may be
mounted on the same post and above the sign to diagram 611.1. The
GIVE WAY sign should not be used where it could confuse drivers
into giving way to traffic from the left as well as from the
right, e.g.on the stem of a T-junction or on any arm of a
four-way junction. When diagram 602 is used, it must be
accompanied by diagram 1023 and by the Give Way marking to
diagram 1003 (see figure 8-3)."

So, if I understand correctly, the roundabouts you have seen have
one road where they have deemed it likely that drivers may not
notice the roundabout with a single dotted line, so it gets the
double line and a "Give Way" sign on the same post as the
roundabout symbol.

Thank you for that.

I checked the highway code, and it isn't clear. Nearby ones have a
mixture (in one case, a double dotted line over half the exit... I
suspect poor repaint after road repairs)

Andy

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 16:41:13 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 25/04/2019 10:52, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:
I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Really? I can't say I've ever noticed that. I'll take your word for it
if you say you've checked ones that are local to you. I'll have a look
when I next encounter some mini-roundabouts.

I have never seen one either.
I can find a few on google where google has stitched in a double line,
but its pretty obvious that it has.

Double line of course means give way to traffic in either direction.

While the single line, in theory, means give way from the left.

To traffic approaching from the right surely?

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 16:41:13 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 25/04/2019 10:52, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:
I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Really? I can't say I've ever noticed that. I'll take your word for it
if you say you've checked ones that are local to you. I'll have a look
when I next encounter some mini-roundabouts.

I have never seen one either.
I can find a few on google where google has stitched in a double line,
but its pretty obvious that it has.

Double line of course means give way to traffic in either direction.

While the single line, in theory, means give way from the left.
With the number of idiots that drive across mini islands that may not be
a good idea.

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).

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-high.../road-markings

The only thing is the one that carries the [Give way to traffic on
major road (can also be used at mini roundabouts)] markings, IS the
main road so is it indicating to people not coming in on that road or
the 'main road' opposite (who wouldn't need giving way to unless they
were doing a U turn on the roundabout)?

Cheers, T i m

Steve Walker wrote:
On 25/04/2019 11:50, FMurtz wrote:
Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

We in Australia do not have to give way to the right, the rule here is
give way to whoever is already in the round about.

Which is the same in the UK. It *is* a form of priority to the right, as
the traffic coming around the roundabout is approaching from your right,
just not the same sort as some countries that drive on the right have!


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.

On 25/04/2019 22:32, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 16:41:13 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 25/04/2019 10:52, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:54:12 +0100, "NY" wrote:
I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere but all of the mini
roundabouts I've checked round here have one entry with double broken
lines (priority?) and all the rest have single?

Really? I can't say I've ever noticed that. I'll take your word for it
if you say you've checked ones that are local to you. I'll have a look
when I next encounter some mini-roundabouts.

I have never seen one either.
I can find a few on google where google has stitched in a double line,
but its pretty obvious that it has.

Double line of course means give way to traffic in either direction.

While the single line, in theory, means give way from the left.

To traffic approaching from the right surely?


oops!

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:43:06 +1000, FMurtz
wrote:

Steve Walker wrote:
On 25/04/2019 11:50, FMurtz wrote:
Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

We in Australia do not have to give way to the right, the rule here is
give way to whoever is already in the round about.

Which is the same in the UK. It *is* a form of priority to the right, as
the traffic coming around the roundabout is approaching from your right,
just not the same sort as some countries that drive on the right have!


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.

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?

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.

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

Cheers, T i m

"FMurtz" wrote in message
...
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.

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.

On 26/04/2019 10:39, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:43:06 +1000, FMurtz
wrote:

Steve Walker wrote:
On 25/04/2019 11:50, FMurtz wrote:
Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

We in Australia do not have to give way to the right, the rule here is
give way to whoever is already in the round about.

Which is the same in the UK. It *is* a form of priority to the right, as
the traffic coming around the roundabout is approaching from your right,
just not the same sort as some countries that drive on the right have!


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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:40:00 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

snip

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?

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.

Ok, that makes sense.

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.

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

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.

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

T i m wrote:

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 13:40:00 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

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.

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. ;-(

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
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 18:33:40 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 00:50:54 UTC+10, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

I guess the guy behind the wheels of the most expensive car gives way to the rest; common sense?!

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

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

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

#Paul

"T i m" wrote in message
...
I am very careful there because you often lose sight of these modern
white lensed indicators when the sun is shining on them. ;-(

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.

On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 08:58:42 +0100, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

snip

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

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.

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

On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 10:08:59 +0100, wrote:

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

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


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

On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 10:51:39 +0100, "NY" wrote:

"T i m" wrote in message
.. .
I am very careful there because you often lose sight of these modern
white lensed indicators when the sun is shining on them. ;-(

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.

Agreed. Good observations.

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.

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

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.

Yup. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

On 27/04/2019 11:22, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 10:08:59 +0100, wrote:

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

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


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.

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.

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).

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.

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!

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

SteveW

On 27/04/2019 10:51, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
I am very careful there because you often lose sight of these modern
white lensed indicators when the sun is shining on them. ;-(

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

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.

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.

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."

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.

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

On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 17:43:55 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

snip

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

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

I saw that in a BMW Mini earlier.

They seem to
work well.

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

The brakes lights similarly use red, red, clear.

Ok.

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).

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.

Agreed.

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!

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

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

Cheers, T i m

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...

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.

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.

On Monday, 22 April 2019 21:30:40 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/04/2019 15:58, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

Priority from the right only applies when vehicles are actually on the
roundabout and, until someone enters, everyone has equal right to do so.


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

wrote in message
...
On Monday, 22 April 2019 21:30:40 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/04/2019 15:58, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before
three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way line
at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has
right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

Priority from the right only applies when vehicles are actually on the
roundabout and, until someone enters, everyone has equal right to do so.


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

Unless two people decide simultaneously (to within some tolerance) to set
off at the same time: mini roundabouts are so small that in the time it
takes to set off, recognise that someone else has also done so and is
blocking your path, and braking to a halt, a collision has occurred.

I think that is the situation that the OP was referring to: everyone waits
for someone else, then when no-one moves, more than one person thinks "sod
this, if no-one's moving, I'll go first", and you have a collision.

This problem can happen in a communications network when two devices try to
talk at the same time and "hear" each other. Fortunately there is a way of
resolving this: "back off, wait a *random* time, and retry" - the crucial
thing being the random element so both don't try to talk again at the same
time.

On 27/04/2019 21:17, NY wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Monday, 22 April 2019 21:30:40 UTC+1, Steve WalkerÂ* wrote:
On 22/04/2019 15:58, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 15:50:49 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

It happened again today as it has happened countless times before
three
vehicles approach at the same time and all stop at the give way
line at
a three way mini roundabout....we all sit there wondering who has
right
of way...so feck it I blasted on around leaving them
sitting....fed up
with everybody stopping and wondering who should go....any body else
found this? ....

Er, priority to the right ?

Priority from the right only applies when vehicles are actually on the
roundabout and, until someone enters, everyone has equal right to do so.


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

Unless two people decide simultaneously (to within some tolerance) to
set off at the same time: mini roundabouts are so small that in the time
it takes to set off, recognise that someone else has also done so and is
blocking your path, and braking to a halt, a collision has occurred.

Not at all. If everyone has come to a stop, when setting off, you'd all
be going slowly and cautiously, just in case, so stopping is easy enough.

I think that is the situation that the OP was referring to: everyone
waits for someone else, then when no-one moves, more than one person
thinks "sod this, if no-one's moving, I'll go first", and you have a
collision.

I've found it more of a problem at a crossroads with give-ways on each
arm. At the worst it has been a case of stop-start-stop-start again -
mildly irritating, but no real danger.

I did contact the council about this junction. It is a simple
crossroads, with a no-entry on the North arm. Originally, there were
give-ways on the East and West. Apparently there were problems with
people coming from the South, not noticing the no-entry signs and going
straight ahead to the North, so the council decided that a give-way on
the North and South would cause them to slow and look more. The
residents to the West didn't want to lose the East-West give-ways, as
they thought it slowed traffic, so the council made it a 4-way give-way.
I pointed out that a simple bollard with no-entry on it blocking the
left side of the North arm would have been far more reliable and would
have prevented the stop-start problems, but councils have their own
weird ideas.

This problem can happen in a communications network when two devices try
to talk at the same time and "hear" each other. Fortunately there is a
way of resolving this: "back off, wait a *random* time, and retry" - the
crucial thing being the random element so both don't try to talk again
at the same time.

Which is basically what drivers do - but hopefully as pre-collision
detection, rather than collision detection

SteveW

On 27/04/2019 20:10, NY wrote:
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...

I remember when mk2 Sierras were common and they were wired in two
different waysÂ* - 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.

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).

The C&U regulations are not toothless, it is simply that they are
overruled by EU legislation that requires us to accept any vehicle type
approved anywhere in the EU.

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.

Definitely.

I've not actually seen any cars with combined tail and fog lights, with
separate brake lights.

Definitely the case with some, but not all, mk2 Sierras. An excellent
design.

, 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.

Agreed. More importantly though is that unlit lights coming on are a lot
more obvious than sidelights getting brighter - even more so when the
fog-lights are already on.

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.

Paired is definitely better - not only does it help with distance, but
it works for driving abroad and gives redundancy if one bulb should fail.

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,

That seems to be common these days. When I was checking that all the
lights worked on my wife's Matiz, I thought that one reversing and one
fog light had failed, 'til I checked and found no wiring or holder in
the unlit ones.

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.

I have been known to do that.

SteveW