|
London Squares
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). 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. Belgrave Square in particular has a phenomenal width of tarmac for no reason, leading cars to speed up noticeably as they circuit the square, when making the grassed area a lot larger would lead to a safer and more pleasant environment while only adding a few seconds to car journeys. Why are so many London squares one way at all, and how long have they been like that? Was the entire one-way system from Park Lane to Gower St/Kingsway created in one go? Has it been regularly modified since? -- 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 |
London Squares
John Rowland:
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). ... Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... -- Mark Brader "Outside of nearly having two head-on collisions, we found driving in England to be fairly easy." Toronto -- Cher Classick |
London Squares
In message , John Rowland
writes Why are so many London squares one way at all, and how long have they been like that? Was the entire one-way system from Park Lane to Gower St/Kingsway created in one go? Has it been regularly modified since? On a similar but slightly different note, I've often wondered if the Aldwych/Strand "D" was always one way from the time it opened? -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
London Squares
In message , Mark Brader
writes John Rowland: 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). ... Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... ........everyone else ought to come into line with the UK and Ireland! :-) ducks -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
London Squares
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 02:19:54 -0000, "John Rowland"
wrote: 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). snip Could this be because it can be seen as one large roundabout, and people are used to those, whereas one working "in reverse" may cause confusion? Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
London Squares
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 Very unlucky to go round anything widdershins tho'. :-) *Keith* |
London Squares
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. 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. Two-way traffic would make that hazardous, and would also lead to lots more conflicting movements at junctions. Forcing you to go the long way round is a well-known technique for discouraging through traffic from a residential area that is not a main traffic artery. Belgrave Square in particular has a phenomenal width of tarmac for no reason, leading cars to speed up noticeably as they circuit the square, when making the grassed area a lot larger would lead to a safer and more pleasant environment while only adding a few seconds to car journeys. I think the wide road is a deliberate design feature intended to impress. I'm not sure whose environment you are trying to improve here. Drivers are presumably happy. The "grassed area" that you want to make larger is already 4.5 acres and contains not just grass but "large plane trees... pergolas with wisteria, roses and passion flowers. There is a quiet garden, a play area for children, a tennis court and a collecttion of statuary reflecting the international nature of the square."* Extending this historic garden just to snarl up the traffic seems pointless. *from advance publicity for Open Gardens Square Weekend, 11/12 June 2005 http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/london.ga...res/index.html -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
London Squares
"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
... In message , Mark Brader writes Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... .......everyone else ought to come into line with the UK and Ireland! .... and Japan, and Australia, And New Zealand, and half the rest of the world... -- 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 |
London Squares
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
... On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 02:19:54 -0000, "John Rowland" wrote: Nearly all London squares have a clockwise one-way system, Could this be because it can be seen as one large roundabout, Exactly, but from a traffic point of view it makes no sense, bnecause a square is just a city block that happens to have no buildings inside[1], and there is no rule that every city block has to be one-way clockwise (obviously). Actually, that's not entirely true, because squares are city blocks in which all four sides have the same name, leading to drivers circuiting the square repeatedly trying to find the building they want.... but since drivers have a much better view of buildings on the right, that's even more reason to circuit squares anti-clockwise. and people are used to those, whereas one working "in reverse" may cause confusion? The angle of the entrance road would force you in the correct direction. Anyway, Queen Square is all clockwise except for the southeast corner, which is two way... now *that's* confusing. And Tavistock Square is two-way all the way around, but the ban on the right turn at the southeast corner means you can't circuit it clockwise and often have to do a longer journey around it in an anti-clockwise direction. So there clearly is a rule, but it is sometimes broken. [1] except Belsize Square, and probably others. -- 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 |
London Squares
an anti-clockwise
one-way system is superior (because drivers have better visibility when curving to the left). There might be better visibility once in the square, curving to the left, but surely with traffic going clockwise, entry TO the roundabout, square or whatever is much easier than if the traffic were coming from the left, since visibility is better to the entering driver, sitting on the right, if traffic is also coming from the right. That same logic is why, presumably, in countries where traffic drives on the right, roundabouts etc. are anti-clockwise. In sharp contradistinction to this, have you witnesses the complicated traffic signalling etc. needed where there ARE anti-clockwise roundabouts in the U.K.? I am thinking particularly of Hammersmith (and now Vauxhall) Bus Stations. The Hammersmith entry/exits are particularly tortuous, and several people have been knocked down (I think one may have died) when trying to walk across the Southern entry/exit lanes on Hammersmith Broadway (i.e. parallel to the flyover) because of the odd direction of those lanes, which are opposite to the way you would expect traffic to travel. Marc. Marc. |
London Squares
"Mait001" wrote in message ... an anti-clockwise one-way system is superior (because drivers have better visibility when curving to the left). There might be better visibility once in the square, curving to the left, but surely with traffic going clockwise, entry TO the roundabout, square or whatever is much easier than if the traffic were coming from the left, since visibility is better to the entering driver, sitting on the right, if traffic is also coming from the right. This is exactly right. Having driven my UK car(s) extensively in Europe for the last three years, by far the hardest thing to do in such a car is filtering right out of a minor road into a major one. It's OK if you come to a stop at 90 degrees, but if the road is wide enough so that you stop at a 60 degree angle your visability of the traffic already on the road is close to zero without turning your head into very akward position. Such a road design would not last very long before it were changed back IMHO. tim |
London Squares
"Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message
... Mark Brader wrote on Sun, 09 Jan 2005 04:44:21 -0000: John Rowland: 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). ... Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... Sweden had left-hand driving until September 3, 1967. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H The costs of doing this in the UK today would be prohibitive, both to highway departments and to private individuals: every road junction would need to have its white lines repainted on the other side; motorway junctions and roundabouts would need their entry and exit roads re-aligning (assuming that entry and exit roads are curved differently - maybe this isn't the case); every car would need to scrapped and replaced with an LHD car. It is probably this last point that is the biggest problem: in Sweden, "most cars were LHD imports" according to the Wikipedia article (what about all the home-produced Volvos?) and there were far fewer cars on the road, whereas in Britain there are nowadays many more cars etc so the replacement cost is far greater. I certainly wouldn't contemplate driving an RHD on the right-hand side of the road because of the visibilty problems when overtaking or pulling out obliquely from a motorway slip-road. It is to be hoped that if we ever *do* change to driving on the right, we don't adopt the Dutch and German rule of traffic joining a roundabout having priority over traffic already on the roundabout. If everything about UK driving at present is merely reversed (including roundabouts becoming anti-clockwise) things will be a lot easier than if rules of priority are altered at the same time. I understand (though I can't quote a source for this) that Brussels has tried (and failed) to make the UK change to the Dutch/German rule on roundabout priority. And let's hope we don't ever succumb to the American rule of allowing overtaking on the driver's blind side (ie his left in an RHD car). That, and four-way stop junctions, were the only part of driving in America that scared me ****less. |
London Squares
"Mait001" wrote in message
... an anti-clockwise one-way system is superior (because drivers have better visibility when curving to the left). There might be better visibility once in the square, curving to the left, but surely with traffic going clockwise, entry TO the roundabout, square or whatever is much easier than if the traffic were coming from the left, since visibility is better to the entering driver, sitting on the right, if traffic is also coming from the right. If London squares are configured as clockwise roundabouts, it allows the normal "give way to traffic on your right that's already on the roundabout" rule to be used; otherwise a contrdictory, counter-intuitive rule would have to be used in those circumstances: hence there woudl be the need at every junction to think "Is this a clockwise roundabout or an anticlockwise one? Do I give way to traffic on my right or on my left in this specific case". Better to have one rule for all situations. |
London Squares
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 02:19:54 -0000, "John Rowland"
wrote: Hi all, vironment while only adding a few seconds to car journeys. Why are so many London squares one way at all, and how long have they been like that? Was the entire one-way system from Park Lane to Gower St/Kingsway created in one go? Has it been regularly modified since? Most squares in Westminster/Camden were converted to one-way operation c.1968 as part of a series of traffic schemes to 'improve efficiency'. The clockwise nature of operation prevents right turns both entering and leaving the square - minimuises conflcts. The removal of the Shoreditch one-way system is symbolic of this trend being reversed. Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
London Squares
Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005:
The costs of doing this in the UK today would be prohibitive, both to highway departments and to private individuals: [snip] Oh, I have no doubt. I expect it would be prohibitive in Sweden as well, had the switchover been postponed until today. I was mostly just stirring the pot and adding a data point. :-) I did read somewhere that officials are now regretting not having done it when Sweden did, as it would have been feasible then, but isn't now. The land-border matter was fairly crucial as well. Pretty much by definition, Britain has no land borders (between countries that differ in something as basic as which side of the road to drive, at least). :-) There used to be a silly joke going round to the effect that the Republic of Ireland (with whom we do, of course, have a land border) was going to change to left-hand drive, but to make it easier, they would do it in stages: lorries and buses one month, cars and cycles the next..... Mind you, given that they measure distances in kilometres and speed in miles per hour (or is it the other way round?), one does wonder.... It is to be hoped that if we ever *do* change to driving on the right, we don't adopt the Dutch and German rule of traffic joining a roundabout having priority over traffic already on the roundabout. Sweden has not; the traffic on the roundabout has priority. (Unless this has changed very recently.) Anything else seems very silly, really, IMAO. In France the traffic on the roundabout has priority, too, and usually there are large notices telling traffic on the joining road that it doesn't have priority. A pity the exits aren't (by our standards) well-signposted - you have to know how the system works! -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 2 January 2005 |
London Squares
Martin Underwood wrote:
"Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Mark Brader wrote on Sun, 09 Jan 2005 04:44:21 -0000: John Rowland: 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). ... Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... Sweden had left-hand driving until September 3, 1967. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H The costs of doing this in the UK today would be prohibitive, ... every car would need to scrapped and replaced with an LHD car. ... I certainly wouldn't contemplate driving an RHD on the right-hand side of the road because of the visibilty problems when overtaking or pulling out obliquely from a motorway slip-road. Ever noticed those white oval plates with GB on them? Ever thought how their owners managed to drive in LHD countries? The idea that you would have to scrap all RHD cars if we changed the rule of the road is absurd. Yes, there are some problems, and overtaking on narrow single-carriageway roads without a passenger to help you is nasty , but I've never had a problem on a motorway apart from paying at the péage where the kiosk is on the British nearside. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
London Squares
Mrs Redboots wrote:
Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: It is to be hoped that if we ever *do* change to driving on the right, we don't adopt the Dutch and German rule of traffic joining a roundabout having priority over traffic already on the roundabout. Sweden has not; the traffic on the roundabout has priority. (Unless this has changed very recently.) Anything else seems very silly, really, IMAO. In France the traffic on the roundabout has priority, too, and usually there are large notices telling traffic on the joining road that it doesn't have priority. That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
London Squares
"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
... Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: There used to be a silly joke going round to the effect that the Republic of Ireland (with whom we do, of course, have a land border) was going to change to left-hand drive, but to make it easier, they would do it in stages: lorries and buses one month, cars and cycles the next..... Mind you, given that they measure distances in kilometres and speed in miles per hour (or is it the other way round?), one does wonder.... When I went over to Ireland on business and had to drive down from Dublin to Wexford, I was warned about the distance signs being in kilometres and the speed signs in miles/hour - a bugger if you're trying to estimate how long your journey will take!. It's even more of a bugger that most cars have speedometers and mileometers calibrated primarily in km/hr or km - you have to remember to read the faint red markings (mph) rather than the obvious white km/hr markings! I was told by the guy I was working for that the Irish authorities are reluctant to change the speed limit signs in case people try to claim that the signs still indicate mph and therefore that they are allowed to drive at 80 in a zone that had previously carried a 50 mph = 80 km/hr speed limit ;-) I have "fond" memories of driving back from Wexford following my Irish colleague who was to lead me through Dublin to the airport. He set off at a hello of a rate (even by my standards!) and kept overtaking in impossible situations. Should I go at a sensible speed (and risk losing him) or should I follow as best I could? Somehow I managed to achieve the dual goals of staying alive and not losing him! But then we hit heavy traffic in Dublin. He signalled me into a hotel carpark where I did a rapid changeover of all my luggage from my car to his, in a scene that must have looked suspiciously like a Crimewatch reconstruction, because he decided we'd make better progress in his car if he didn't have to keep checking whether I was keeping up with him. We still missed my flight, but after a pint or two of Guinness in the airport bar, the prospect of waiting a couple of hours to the next available flight didn't seem so bad ;-) |
London Squares
"Richard J." wrote in message
k... Martin Underwood wrote: "Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Ever noticed those white oval plates with GB on them? Ever thought how their owners managed to drive in LHD countries? The idea that you would have to scrap all RHD cars if we changed the rule of the road is absurd. Yes, there are some problems, and overtaking on narrow single-carriageway roads without a passenger to help you is nasty , but I've never had a problem on a motorway apart from paying at the péage where the kiosk is on the British nearside. 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 - especially if I was on my own and didn't have a passenger in the front seat who could check the door mirror for overtaking traffic as I would if I was driving an LHD car. Having to take my eyes off the road ahead while I checked and checked again in the opposite mirror (or even over my left shoulder, peering between the door pillars) is just too dangerous. I know plenty of people do it, but not me. RHD cars would effectively be priced out of the market, firstly because their resale value would be much less than for an equivalent LHD car, and secondly because the insurance would be so much greater... because insurance companies perceive "wrong-sided" cars to be a much greater risk. OK, so the problem would gradually decline as old RHD cars were replaced with new LHD cars, but it would take a long time. Realistically, you'd need to combine the changeover of cars and roads: without a change of cars, there'd be no incentive to change the roads as there'd be resistance from people like me! If we'd done it several decades ago, it would have been feasible, but nowadays it's not a realistic option. What a shame that The World didn't agree right from the outset of the motor car to drive on the same side of the road - but there were issues of national pride at stake, especially Napolean's policy of "if everyone else does it one way, we in France will do it the other way" (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the gist). It's always intrigued me that America chose to drive on the right, given the large number of British people who settled there. No doubt the number of immigrants from other European countries swayed the argument. Which countries still drive on the left? - UK/Ireland, obviously - Channel Islands - Australia - Malta - Gibraltar? Or does that drive on the left like Spain? - Japan (I wonder why) What about former British colonies like India? I *think* they still drive on the left. Anywhere else? |
London Squares
"Richard J." wrote in message
k... Mrs Redboots wrote: Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. In the same way that they used "priorité à droite" to give priority to a minor road that joined a major road, forcing traffic travelling at high speed to brake to let a slow-moving tractor pull out in front. I wonder what the French road safety rule-makers were smoking when they came up with that rule! |
London Squares
In article , Richard J.
wrote: Mrs Redboots wrote: Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: It is to be hoped that if we ever *do* change to driving on the right, we don't adopt the Dutch and German rule of traffic joining a roundabout having priority over traffic already on the roundabout. Sweden has not; the traffic on the roundabout has priority. (Unless this has changed very recently.) Anything else seems very silly, really, IMAO. In France the traffic on the roundabout has priority, too, and usually there are large notices telling traffic on the joining road that it doesn't have priority. That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. Yes, and awful jams resulted! Michael Bell -- |
London Squares
"Richard J." wrote in message
k... Mrs Redboots wrote: Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. In the same way that they used "priorité à droite" to give priority to a minor road that joined a major road, forcing traffic travelling at high speed to brake to let a slow-moving tractor pull out in front. I wonder what the French road safety rule-makers were smoking when they came up with that rule! I believe in New Zealand (or maybe Australia) you have to give way to oncoming traffic that it indicating to turn right (ie your left) across your path into a side road. |
Right hand traffic (was London Squares)
In article ,
Martin Underwood wrote: "Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Mark Brader wrote on Sun, 09 Jan 2005 04:44:21 -0000: John Rowland: 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). ... Perhaps this was done in preparation for a changeover to driving on the right. After all, now that Britain is part of the EU... Sweden had left-hand driving until September 3, 1967. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H The costs of doing this in the UK today would be prohibitive, both to highway departments and to private individuals: every road junction would need to have its white lines repainted on the other side; motorway junctions and roundabouts would need their entry and exit roads re-aligning (assuming that entry and exit roads are curved differently - maybe this isn't the case); every car would need to scrapped and replaced with an LHD car. I remember calculating at the time that the Swedish change-over cost 2 week's GNP. That's an awful lot of money. And for what? Junction 8 on the M1 was designed "wrong way round" in Mrs Castle's time to test the idea of designing junctions so that they could be changed over to right-hand drive, but the experiment was never repeated. Michael Bell -- |
London Squares
In message ,
Martin Underwood writes Which countries still drive on the left? Not Gibralter. But add India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa. All 74 are listed at: http://users.pandora.be/worldstandar...tm#leftdriving -- Paul Terry |
London Squares
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:53:03 -0000, "Martin Underwood"
wrote: Which countries still drive on the left? - UK/Ireland, obviously - Channel Islands - Australia - Malta - Gibraltar? Or does that drive on the left like Spain? - Japan (I wonder why) What about former British colonies like India? I *think* they still drive on the left. Anywhere else? Malaysia, Pakistan, Bangadesh, Thailand, parts of southern Africa.. someone must have a list on line somewhere. http://users.pandora.be/worldstandar...tm#leftdriving gives 74 places and a pretty map. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
London Squares
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... "Richard J." wrote in message k... Martin Underwood wrote: "Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Ever noticed those white oval plates with GB on them? Ever thought how their owners managed to drive in LHD countries? The idea that you would have to scrap all RHD cars if we changed the rule of the road is absurd. Yes, there are some problems, and overtaking on narrow single-carriageway roads without a passenger to help you is nasty , but I've never had a problem on a motorway apart from paying at the péage where the kiosk is on the British nearside. 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. With my RHD car I just have to accept that I can't overtake on single carriageway roads, but fortunately most journeys nowadays are on motorways. With a LHD car I still position myself on the right half of the carriageway and end up with the bulk of the car: in the kerb, scraping a wall or occupying both lanes of a dual carriageway Which countries still drive on the left? - UK/Ireland, obviously - Channel Islands - Australia - Malta - Gibraltar? Or does that drive on the left like Spain? - Japan (I wonder why) What about former British colonies like India? I *think* they still drive on the left. Anywhere else? Most of Arfica. Apparently, by population a larger percentage of the world nominaly drives on the Left than the right, but most of the countries that make up this large total have very low car ownership tim |
London Squares
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... It is to be hoped that if we ever *do* change to driving on the right, we don't adopt the Dutch and German rule of traffic joining a roundabout having priority over traffic already on the roundabout. This rule seems to have gone out of use. I have never seen a roundabout where it is still used. It is still common for a side road to have priority over the main road though. tim |
London Squares
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:51:49 +0100, "tim"
wrote: It is still common for a side road to have priority over the main road though. This in itself isn't unknown in British towns. It's normally achieved by way of a mini roundabout. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
London Squares
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... "Richard J." wrote in message k... Mrs Redboots wrote: Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. In the same way that they used "priorité à droite" to give priority to a minor road that joined a major road, forcing traffic travelling at high speed to brake to let a slow-moving tractor pull out in front. I wonder what the French road safety rule-makers were smoking when they came up with that rule! I believe in New Zealand (or maybe Australia) you have to give way to oncoming traffic that it indicating to turn right (ie your left) across your path into a side road. Not here. Peter Sydney |
London Squares
John Rowland wrote:
Anyway, Queen Square is all clockwise except for the southeast corner, which is two way... now *that's* confusing. Russell Square now has a Northbound bus lane on the East side, so that that side is 2-way. However, if I remember correctly, there is a physical barrier (kerbstones or similar) between the two lanes. -- John Ray |
London Squares
"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
... "Richard J." wrote in message k... Martin Underwood wrote: "Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Ever noticed those white oval plates with GB on them? Ever thought how their owners managed to drive in LHD countries? The idea that you would have to scrap all RHD cars if we changed the rule of the road is absurd. Yes, there are some problems, and overtaking on narrow single-carriageway roads without a passenger to help you is nasty , but I've never had a problem on a motorway apart from paying at the péage where the kiosk is on the British nearside. 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 - especially if I was on my own and didn't have a passenger in the front seat who could check the door mirror for overtaking traffic as I would if I was driving an LHD car. Having to take my eyes off the road ahead while I checked and checked again in the opposite mirror (or even over my left shoulder, peering between the door pillars) is just too dangerous. I know plenty of people do it, but not me. RHD cars would effectively be priced out of the market, firstly because their resale value would be much less than for an equivalent LHD car, and secondly because the insurance would be so much greater... because insurance companies perceive "wrong-sided" cars to be a much greater risk. OK, so the problem would gradually decline as old RHD cars were replaced with new LHD cars, but it would take a long time. Realistically, you'd need to combine the changeover of cars and roads: without a change of cars, there'd be no incentive to change the roads as there'd be resistance from people like me! If we'd done it several decades ago, it would have been feasible, but nowadays it's not a realistic option. What a shame that The World didn't agree right from the outset of the motor car to drive on the same side of the road - but there were issues of national pride at stake, especially Napolean's policy of "if everyone else does it one way, we in France will do it the other way" (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the gist). It's always intrigued me that America chose to drive on the right, given the large number of British people who settled there. No doubt the number of immigrants from other European countries swayed the argument. Which countries still drive on the left? - UK/Ireland, obviously - Channel Islands - Australia - Malta - Gibraltar? Or does that drive on the left like Spain? - Japan (I wonder why) What about former British colonies like India? I *think* they still drive on the left. Anywhere else? In The Bahamas you drive on the left - in a LHD car! Driving on the left comes from Britain but almost all of the cars come from the US (at the closest The Bahamas are only 60 miles off the Florida coast). Buses / coaches / trucks however come from Japan and so are RHD. So being in a nice modern cab (LHD) was a *lot* more scary than travelling in an old 'pack as many people in as possible and drive as fast as possible' but RHD mini-bus. -- regards Stephen |
London Squares
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
... On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:51:49 +0100, "tim" wrote: It is still common for a side road to have priority over the main road though. This in itself isn't unknown in British towns. It's normally achieved by way of a mini roundabout. In other words, with very clear advance warning signs and road markings to give the driver on the major road time to slow down to a realistic speed to be able to stop if a car *does* approach from the right. |
London Squares
"peter" wrote in message
... "Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... "Richard J." wrote in message k... Mrs Redboots wrote: Niklas Karlsson wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 9 Jan 2005: That's because the rule was changed some years ago. Before then "priorité à droite" used to apply to roundabouts, giving joining traffic the priority. In the same way that they used "priorité à droite" to give priority to a minor road that joined a major road, forcing traffic travelling at high speed to brake to let a slow-moving tractor pull out in front. I wonder what the French road safety rule-makers were smoking when they came up with that rule! I believe in New Zealand (or maybe Australia) you have to give way to oncoming traffic that it indicating to turn right (ie your left) across your path into a side road. Not here. Peter Sydney Must be NZ then. I knew it was either Oz or NZ. |
Driving on the right - my experiences
"tim" wrote in message
... "Martin Underwood" wrote in message ... "Richard J." wrote in message k... Martin Underwood wrote: "Niklas Karlsson" wrote in message ... Ever noticed those white oval plates with GB on them? Ever thought how their owners managed to drive in LHD countries? The idea that you would have to scrap all RHD cars if we changed the rule of the road is absurd. Yes, there are some problems, and overtaking on narrow single-carriageway roads without a passenger to help you is nasty , but I've never had a problem on a motorway apart from paying at the péage where the kiosk is on the British nearside. 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. With my RHD car I just have to accept that I can't overtake on single carriageway roads, but fortunately most journeys nowadays are on motorways. Even on a motorway you'd have to take your eyes off the road ahead and look a long way off-axis to see the nearside (left-hand) mirror. To be really sure, an over-the-shoulder check is probably advisable. This requires you to anticipate the need to overtake further in advance to allow a bit of extra distance from the car in front yo cover the time when you're not looking straight ahead. With a LHD car I still position myself on the right half of the carriageway and end up with the bulk of the car: in the kerb, scraping a wall or occupying both lanes of a dual carriageway I found when I drove in America that driving on the other side of the road came a lot more easily than I was expecting: I simply reversed everything in my brain. The main difficulties came with adapting to things that weren't just a lateral inversion but were differences between US and UK signing and road marking: - lack of amber light to warn that traffic lights were about to turn green - appalling direction signing on non-highway (ie single-carriageway roads): maybe I'm too used to the British standard of signposting where at almost every junction the places and distances that can be reached in each direction are shown, so you don't have to look out for small white-on-pale-green road-name signs - lack of a stop or give-way line across the road where my minor road meets a major road; this was especially a problem where the minor road met the major road on a bend: judging where to aim to stop was difficult - coupled with the previous problem, pedestrian crossings consist of two very prominent white lines across the road, between which the pedestrians walk: where a crossing was close to a junction, I tended to stop at the crossing (even when there were no pedestrians) thinking it was the junction stop line - four-way stop junctions: any junction which depends on the time (order) at which cars arrived (instead of their relative position on the road) to determine who has priority is pretty stupid because it's open to two people having different ideas as to who has priority - "disappearing lanes" on highways/freeways: if you're in the right-most lane on the approach to a junction, you need to hop out into the next lane or you'll often find yourself being directed off at the junction - remembering that US speed limits are generally some 10 to 20 mph slower than British ones would be for the same type of road - not being afraid to overtake a car on the "wrong" side because he's decide to travel slowly in a lane that's close to the central reservation It was fun to watch Americans try to negotiate the few roundabouts ("rotaries", "traffic circles") that I encountered: they were bewildered whereas I just said to myself "give way to traffic on my left on the roundabout and think of the mirror image". The roundabout as you go onto Cape Cod sticks in my mind! I got several funny looks from drivers who were in the right-hand lane and indicating right when I overtook them on the roundabout because I was in the left lane going straight ahead... Positioning on the road was a problem on country lanes where there was no kerb stone: occasionally I found that I'd drifted slightly onto the verge. One thing I liked about US driving (certainly in rural Massachussets) was the courtesy of other drivers, both to car drivers and to pedestrians: there was more tendency to drivers on major roads to let ones on minor roads pull out, and several times when I was on foot I had drivers stop to let me cross the road even though I'd only stopped to sightsee and wasn't actually planning to cross! And I liked the idea of temporary speed limits outside schools etc: very slow during arrival/departure times but realistic at all other times, whereas we'd probably have a blanket 30 (or even 20) 24 hours a day. |
London Squares
"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
... There used to be a silly joke going round to the effect that the Republic of Ireland (with whom we do, of course, have a land border) was going to change to left-hand drive, but to make it easier, they would do it in stages: lorries and buses one month, cars and cycles the next..... Mind you, given that they measure distances in kilometres and speed in miles per hour (or is it the other way round?), one does wonder.... Nigeria made the change, and lorries and buses changed first, then cars a few days later. They did however keep cars off the road for those few days.... -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
Right hand traffic (was London Squares)
"Michael Bell" wrote in message
... Junction 8 on the M1 was designed "wrong way round" in Mrs Castle's time to test the idea of designing junctions so that they could be changed over to right-hand drive, but the experiment was never repeated. In what way was it designed the wrong way round? Just wrong gradients and curvatures? Anyway, I really think that the world's motor copmpanies should standardise the side that the indicator stick is on. Would it be too hard to design cars such that the pedals, steering wheel and glovebox could be swapped when you drive from one country to another? -- 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 |
London Squares
Martin Underwood and "Peter" write:
I believe in New Zealand (or maybe Australia) you have to give way to oncoming traffic that it indicating to turn right (ie your left) across your path into a side road. Not here. Must be NZ then. The silly NZ rule actually is about traffic converging into a side street. The car turning left must yield... er, give way... to the one turning right. -- Mark Brader | "...it's a characteristic ... of organizations that try Toronto | to anticipate every possible failu they easily | come to believe that they *have*..." --Henry Spencer |
London Squares
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:36:53 -0000, "Martin Underwood"
wrote: I was told by the guy I was working for that the Irish authorities are reluctant to change the speed limit signs in case people try to claim that the signs still indicate mph and therefore that they are allowed to drive at 80 in a zone that had previously carried a 50 mph = 80 km/hr speed limit ;-) Well, they're doing it now, in 9 days... http://www.gometric.ie/ The new signs will, at least for now, show "km/h" under the figure. Richard. |
Driving on the wrong side of the road (was: London Squares)
Annabel Smyth:
There used to be a silly joke going round to the effect that the Republic of Ireland (with whom we do, of course, have a land border) was going to change to left-hand drive, but to make it easier, they would do it in stages: lorries and buses one month, cars and cycles the next..... You know, when I raised this subject, I thought *I* was making a silly joke. From the amount of reaction, I see now that I was actually right and this change *does* need to be made. (Yes, I'm still joking.) Mind you, given that they measure distances in kilometres and speed in miles per hour (or is it the other way round?), one does wonder.... Martin Underwood: I was told by the guy I was working for that the Irish authorities are reluctant to change the speed limit signs in case people try to claim that the signs still indicate mph ... Of course, it would be too much effort for them to look at Canada and think of putting a "km/h" plate under each sign as it was changed. -- Mark Brader "Fighting off all of the species which you Toronto have insulted would be a full-time mission." "Deja Q", ST:TNG, Richard Danus |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk