"Adrian" wrote in message
. 1.4...

Or the council car park at the side of M&S in
Rickmansworth - that's "wrong-side-of-road" as you go in.

It's a flat outside carpark... In and out are
next to each other, just the wrong way round.

Presumably there is a barrier between them, i.e. it's a short dual
carriageway. There are probably many short dual carriageways where the
carriageways are the wrong way round - The Hale in Tottenham Hale springs to
mind. The significance of Savoy Court and the ladder rungs in Russell Lane
is that they are *single* carriageways where you drive on the right.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

John Rowland ) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

Or the council car park at the side of M&S in
Rickmansworth - that's "wrong-side-of-road" as you go in.

It's a flat outside carpark... In and out are
next to each other, just the wrong way round.

Presumably there is a barrier between them, i.e. it's a short dual
carriageway

Nope. Just a little paint for the first couple of metres, then it peters
out.

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:54:57 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote:

This web-page has some interesting ideas on the reasons behind
left/right driving, taken mostly from the book: 'The Rule of the Road:
An International Guide to History and Practice' by Peter Kincaid .

I'm not sure what you mean by "this webpage" but the one I and others
mentioned ....

http://users.pandora.be/worldstandar...ft.htm#history

suggests that the type of very large wagon teams used in the USA (but
not GB) were driven by a rider on the left rear horse ("so he could keep
his right arm free to lash the team") and since he was sitting on the
left the natural position was to keep to the right of road. I have no
idea if that really is the explanation, but it seems plausible.


Er, could have sworn I pasted the link in:
http://www.brianlucas.ca/roadside/

The reason it's worth reading is that it (and, I presume, the book)
treat many of the purported reasons for left/right side of the road
with a healthy scepticism.

Martin

Martin @ Strawberry Hill

In message , Huge
writes
Ian Jelf writes:
In message , Terry Harper
writes
It's interesting that many lorries in Italy have RHD, presumably so that
they can position themselves accurately wrt the edge of the road on mountain
passes.

A trait shared with some Swiss Post Buses.

And US Post Office delivery Jeeps.

And formerly Belgian Post Office vans, come to think of it.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

John Rowland wrote:
"Richard J." wrote in message
k...
John Rowland wrote:
Hi all,

Nearly all London squares have a clockwise one-way
system, even though when all of the roads in and out
of the square are one-way, an anti-clockwise one-way
system is superior (because drivers have
better visibility when curving to the left).

I think that's a very marginal advantage, offset by the better
view of vehicles joining the roundabout from the driver's left.

Why would traffic already on the square need to have a view of
traffic joining it, over whom they have prority?

To avoid collisions? (Priorities are not always observed.) I was merely
pointing out that the very marginal disadvantage from clockwise
circulation was offset by an equally marginal advantage.

Many squares, such as St James, have roads
which are wide enough to be two-way,
and the squares are large enough that you don't
particularly want to be forced to go the long way around
for no reason, so I don't know why they one-way at all.

The road around St James's Square is not all that wide,
but it does allow a slow car, whose driver is seeking
a parking space, to be overtaken.

I can't think of any non-square which has been made one-way just to
aid overtaking of parking cars.

It's one of the main advantages of a one-way street that a very slow or
stationary vehicle can be overtaken without waiting for oncoming traffic
to clear. The improvement in traffic flow is the main reason why
one-way streets were introduced. If two-way traffic was introduced as
you suggest, I suspect that you would lose more time from disrupted
traffic flow than you would gain from shorter journeys.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Mrs Redboots wrote:
Paul Weaver wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 10 Jan 2005:

"tim" wrote in message
...
If I had to drive in mainland Europe, I'd always hire a car
locally and
wouldn't contemplate taking my own RHD car over there

Having done both, I find that sitting on the wrong side
of the car is far harder to get used to than positioning
myself on the wrong side of the road.

It's the gear stick I cant get used to.

Except that in the USA they don't know how to drive manual shift
cars,
so that you always get an automatic anyway.....

True enough. And it also means that for an expat in the US (like me)
coming back to the UK and hiring a car, the hardest part isn't driving
on the other side of the road -- it's remembering how to drive a
manual!

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:47:21 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper"
wrote:

Really the answer is to provide an extra lane between junctions, so that
there is never any need to merge off a slip road.

I don't like that when driving a slower vehicle (e.g. a minibus)
because it means you are forever moving back and forth. I think most
lorry drivers would probably agree - unless such lanes were
permanently marked with dotted lines to be for turning vehicles only.

It seems to work well from Junction 10 (A3) onwards clockwise on the M25. In
general 4 lanes between junctions, three lanes through them.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
Web Site: http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

"Terry Harper" wrote in message
...
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:47:21 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper"
wrote:

Really the answer is to provide an extra lane between junctions, so that
there is never any need to merge off a slip road.

I don't like that when driving a slower vehicle (e.g. a minibus)
because it means you are forever moving back and forth. I think most
lorry drivers would probably agree - unless such lanes were
permanently marked with dotted lines to be for turning vehicles only.

It seems to work well from Junction 10 (A3) onwards clockwise on the M25.
In
general 4 lanes between junctions, three lanes through them.

And do "tortoise" vehicles have to keep changing lanes as they approach and
leave each junction?

If you mark the lanes for turning vehicles only, then you are turning a
four-lane motorway into a three-lane motorway everywhere except close to the
junction.

Much more of a problem is two-lane motorways and dual-carriageways where
lorries and other slow-moving vehicles are allowed to use both lanes. I live
close to the A34 in Oxfordshire and I know only too well that antisocial
lorry drivers regularly clog-up the road because they think it's acceptable
to overtake each other when the overtaking lorry is going only a couple of
mph faster than the lorry it is passing. It seems like common sense that you
don't overtake unless you can complete the manoeuvre quickly, without taking
ages over it. The record that I've observed was a lorry that stayed
absolutely dead-level with another lorry for over three minutes until the
lorry that was being overtaken took the pragmatic approach and braked to
allow the overtaking lorry to pull in ahead of it and open up the road again
to drivers wanting to do more than 40 mph.

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
...
"Terry Harper" wrote in message
...

It seems to work well from Junction 10 (A3) onwards clockwise on the
M25.
In
general 4 lanes between junctions, three lanes through them.

And do "tortoise" vehicles have to keep changing lanes as they approach
and
leave each junction?

Have you never driven round the M25? Nobody "has" to do anything. The
overhead signs in advance of each junction clearly indicate that the
nearside lane is exit only from that point onwards. Depending on how far it
is between junctions, then vehicles may move to the nearside lane or stay in
the second lane. Between Junction 11 (Chertsey) and Junction 12 (M3) only
vehicles wanting to leave on the M3 are usually to be found in the nearside
lane, because it is a short distance. The advantage is that it gives
vehicles a much better chance of getting into the exit lane well in advance
of the junction, and stops much of the last-minute darting for the exit that
you find elsewhere.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
Web Site: http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

"Terry Harper" wrote in message
...
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
...
"Terry Harper" wrote in message
...

It seems to work well from Junction 10 (A3) onwards clockwise on the
M25.
In
general 4 lanes between junctions, three lanes through them.

And do "tortoise" vehicles have to keep changing lanes as they approach
and
leave each junction?

Have you never driven round the M25? Nobody "has" to do anything. The
overhead signs in advance of each junction clearly indicate that the
nearside lane is exit only from that point onwards. Depending on how far
it
is between junctions, then vehicles may move to the nearside lane or stay
in
the second lane. Between Junction 11 (Chertsey) and Junction 12 (M3) only
vehicles wanting to leave on the M3 are usually to be found in the
nearside
lane, because it is a short distance. The advantage is that it gives
vehicles a much better chance of getting into the exit lane well in
advance
of the junction, and stops much of the last-minute darting for the exit
that
you find elsewhere.

But this isn't why it is like that.

It is because when they widened to 4 lanes it was too expensive
to rebuild the junction so the extra lane was only built between
the junctions. As you say it works well, but I don't think that they
often do it that way by design.

tim


--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
Web Site: http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/