Rhythm Thief:
It’s amazing how many drivers seem to think that having their foglights on renders them invincible, carrying on at 70+mph with foglights on. And how many don’t seem to understand that once the fog has cleared, pressing the foglight switch a second time will actually turn the foglights off.
F f s I haven’t even got any fog lights on the front,it’s a bloody basic g- cab without even a drivers side electric window,winder.
I don’t drive at 70 mph I drive on the limiter,which on those motors is 53/54/55 mph dependent on which truck it is.
Fog just doesn’t spook me,I’ve drove in it for 40+ years!I just don’t worry!sit back relax!far better the hunched up!tense!worrying what might be round the corner across the road.
3 1/2 hours driving in a relaxed manner I’m far more likely to not have a accident than the driver tensed up,eyes popping out of his head,hunched up,seeing things that rant there.
Too many drivers are beaten just by the mention of the word FOG,it’s a mindset,stay positive,relax and you’ll be fine,and that’s comming from a driver who hasn’t even got ANY FOGLIGHTS
Truckbling:
and how many lorry drivers will be on the limiter even though they cant see 50 yards ahead?
Southampton back up last night,limiter all the way other than when tripping over spooked car/ truck drivers ,only really came down end m69, 46, know them like the back of my hands,so no problem.
Just suprised we’ve not had a call to park the trucks up when it’s foggy .
Truckbling:
and how many lorry drivers will be on the limiter even though they cant see 50 yards ahead?
Southampton back up last night,limiter all the way other than when tripping over spooked car/ truck drivers ,only really came down end m69, 46, know them like the back of my hands,so no problem.
Just suprised we’ve not had a call to park the trucks up when it’s foggy .
Ok ady1
Yep I’m fine,200 mile,3/12 hrs driving,no fog lights,no break,don’t want a medal,just did my job as plenty of other drivers did that night,without turning a bit of fog into a major drama
A few muppets on the A5 today and yesterday near Crick, overtaking on the dual bits and disappearing into the fog at high speed. Some without light on.
My original post wasn’t a dig at anyone doing 45mph in dense fog. Indeed I had it down to about 40mph for periods last night, the fog was particularly dense at the bottom of the M1 between the M25 and Milton Keynes and visibility must have been down to about 20-30 Metres in places. My point is that when visbility is that bad, we don’t need the added obstacle of the middle lane clowns causing people to either undertake or have to go into lane 2 and start flashing. Coming up the M1 near Luton Airport in the section where there’s 4 lanes I came upon a Fiesta driver in lane 3 with his hazards on at about 30mph. The last thing you want to see appearing out of the murkiness is a set of hazards on in lane 3.
Just out of curiosity, has anyone on here EVER seen anyone pulled by the police for poor lane discipline? I’ve been driving for a living since 2008 (which admittedly isn’t a huge amount of time compared to some on here) and do nearly 2500 miles per week on the motorways and I haven’t once seen it.
Rhythm Thief:
It’s amazing how many drivers seem to think that having their foglights on renders them invincible, carrying on at 70+mph with foglights on. And how many don’t seem to understand that once the fog has cleared, pressing the foglight switch a second time will actually turn the foglights off.
F f s I haven’t even got any fog lights on the front,it’s a bloody basic g- cab without even a drivers side electric window,winder.
I don’t drive at 70 mph I drive on the limiter,which on those motors is 53/54/55 mph dependent on which truck it is.
Fog just doesn’t spook me,I’ve drove in it for 40+ years!I just don’t worry!sit back relax!far better the hunched up!tense!worrying what might be round the corner across the road.
3 1/2 hours driving in a relaxed manner I’m far more likely to not have a accident than the driver tensed up,eyes popping out of his head,hunched up,seeing things that rant there.
Too many drivers are beaten just by the mention of the word FOG,it’s a mindset,stay positive,relax and you’ll be fine,and that’s comming from a driver who hasn’t even got ANY FOGLIGHTS
I wasn’t talking to - or about - you. Your post was so obviously a wind up it wasn’t really worth a response.
Rhythm Thief:
It’s amazing how many drivers seem to think that having their foglights on renders them invincible, carrying on at 70+mph with foglights on. And how many don’t seem to understand that once the fog has cleared, pressing the foglight switch a second time will actually turn the foglights off.
F f s I haven’t even got any fog lights on the front,it’s a bloody basic g- cab without even a drivers side electric window,winder.
I don’t drive at 70 mph I drive on the limiter,which on those motors is 53/54/55 mph dependent on which truck it is.
Fog just doesn’t spook me,I’ve drove in it for 40+ years!I just don’t worry!sit back relax!far better the hunched up!tense!worrying what might be round the corner across the road.
3 1/2 hours driving in a relaxed manner I’m far more likely to not have a accident than the driver tensed up,eyes popping out of his head,hunched up,seeing things that rant there.
Too many drivers are beaten just by the mention of the word FOG,it’s a mindset,stay positive,relax and you’ll be fine,and that’s comming from a driver who hasn’t even got ANY FOGLIGHTS
You drive on the limiter, even though visibility is reduced and you’re fully aware that there are drivers on the road that are, and I quote, hunched up!tense!worrying what might be round the corner across the road
Hopefully you only kill or seriously injure yourself
As always on here if someone says something different to the t/ net clique there a troll.
No there just capable of driving in a bit of fog without turning it into a major drama,drivers( or most) will as I continue to drive in fog ,as they have done since the year dot
No ones saying drive at 10 mph but driving at a speed you can stop from within your visibility is a much safer way.
Sprinter Si:
My point is that when visbility is that bad, we don’t need the added obstacle of the middle lane clowns causing people to either undertake or have to go into lane 2 and start flashing.
What’s the problem with undertaking?
They’re probably sat in lane two because they know they’re less likely to get rear ended by a steering wheel attendant running on the limiter in lane one.
It’s self preservation… and I don’t blame 'em considering some of the clowns that are allowed to drive lorries on our roads.
Sprinter Si:
My point is that when visbility is that bad, we don’t need the added obstacle of the middle lane clowns causing people to either undertake or have to go into lane 2 and start flashing.
What’s the problem with undertaking?
They’re probably sat in lane two because they know they’re less likely to get rear ended by a steering wheel attendant running on the limiter in lane one.
It’s self preservation… and I don’t blame 'em considering some of the clowns that are allowed to drive lorries on our roads.
I’ve read and reread this and I can’t make the logic stack up. Surely the faster traffic is more likely to be using lanes two or three, and while anyone going slowly in lane two is certainly less likely to be rear ended by a steering wheel attendant on the limiter in lane one, they’re more likely to be rear ended by a steering wheel attendant on the limiter in lane, er, two. Given that sensible lorry drivers will be trundling along in lane one at whatever speed they feel they can see enough in front of them, and the steering wheel attendants will be hammering along on the limiter in lane two, it follows that the middle lane is a rather silly place to be if you have no reason to be there. It’s certainly no safer than lane one.
Sprinter Si:
My point is that when visbility is that bad, we don’t need the added obstacle of the middle lane clowns causing people to either undertake or have to go into lane 2 and start flashing.
What’s the problem with undertaking?
They’re probably sat in lane two because they know they’re less likely to get rear ended by a steering wheel attendant running on the limiter in lane one.
It’s self preservation… and I don’t blame 'em considering some of the clowns that are allowed to drive lorries on our roads.
I’ve read and reread this and I can’t make the logic stack up. Surely the faster traffic is more likely to be using lanes two or three, and while anyone going slowly in lane two is certainly less likely to be rear ended by a steering wheel attendant on the limiter in lane one, they’re more likely to be rear ended by a steering wheel attendant on the limiter in lane, er, two. Given that sensible lorry drivers will be trundling along in lane one at whatever speed they feel they can see enough in front of them, and the steering wheel attendants will be hammering along on the limiter in lane two, it follows that the middle lane is a rather silly place to be if you have no reason to be there. It’s certainly no safer than lane one.
^^^this^^^
The middle lane is the domain of the wannabe organ donor, best to keep it to the left and stay out of harm’s way
newmercman:
…keep it to the left and stay out of harm’s way
If I ever found myself in a car, on the motorway, in thick fog, kids in the back, traffic comes to a standstill; the last place I’d want to be is at the back of the queue in lane one waiting for dozy to come along.
Being at the back of the queue is an unfortunate place to be anyway, with folk like Dozy loose about the place. Whether you get rear ended in lane one or lane two is all down to luck, no more than that. Sitting in lane two isn’t going to significantly reduce the chances of it happening.
Rhythm Thief:
Whether you get rear ended in lane one or lane two is all down to luck, no more than that. Sitting in lane two isn’t going to significantly reduce the chances of it happening.
I disagree.
There’s no such thing as luck. There is such a thing as “the laws of probability” though.
Go and stand on a motorway bridge all night and count how many lorries pass underneath you in lane one and how many pass underneath you in lane two.
Rhythm Thief:
Whether you get rear ended in lane one or lane two is all down to luck, no more than that. Sitting in lane two isn’t going to significantly reduce the chances of it happening.
I disagree.
There’s no such thing as luck. There is such a thing as “the laws of probability” though.
Go and stand on a motorway bridge all night and count how many lorries pass underneath you in lane one and how many pass underneath you in lane two.
Maybe. The point is that faster lorries are more likely to be in lane two, and slower ones in lane one. If I had to be at the back of the queue, I’d very much prefer to be in lane one. I’d still be keeping a sharp eye on my mirrors though.
