Middle-lane hogging

Taffic on the M1 (linked from the BBC News Magazine)

Today I came across a BBC article Motorway middle-lane hoggers to face on-the-spot fines. It turns out that the proposed fines are not just about middle-lane hogging but about a number of frequently practiced, and arguably "minor" careless driving offences. Predictably though the reader comments mostly focused on the subject in the title. I was even moved to add my own contribution to the comments; something I rarely do.

I have just found another BBC article: Who, what, why: What's wrong with middle-lane hogging? which, in talking to a number of experts and pundits, aims to discover why middle-lane hogging is a bad thing. I think the article is generally reasonable but I don't think it managed to uncover all of the issues.

The environment

First I'll establish the environment. We are talking about driving on motorways in the UK, where we drive on the left. The left hand lane is the inside lane, the right hand lane is the outside lane. Sometimes the lanes are simply numbered 1, 2 and so on, from left to right. Some people incorrectly call them slow lane... fast lane. In fact (with some exceptions) the speed limit on motorways is 70 mph (yes, many of us go faster than this, but it is strictly illegal) in any lane.

The Highway Code says that the inside lane is for driving and the other lanes are for overtaking. Once an overtaking manoeuvre is complete you should return to the inside lane. You should not undertake (i.e. pass someone on the left) except "In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake."

Discuss

Undertaking

I have driven in a number of countries, and I am aware that in some parts of the USA it is permissible to pass to the left or the right. The emphasis most of the time is on minimising the amount of lane changing going on, so you sit in a given lane and allow people to pass you on both sides. I actually think that's a great idea and I'd support its introduction in the UK but that's not the rule we have.

Why is that important? Well, I might prefer the rules to be different but it doesn't do anyone any good if I start playing to my own rules. Specifically, on this point of passing both sides. When driving on a motorway in the UK, if you wish to change lanes, you assume that vehicles to your right are moving faster than you are, and that vehicles to your left are moving more slowly or at the same speed. If suddenly a vehicle to your left is moving faster then there is a good chance, you either won't notice him, or having noticed him, you will assume he will not gain on you, at least in the next couple of seconds, and find that you are trying to move into the space he is now occupying. OK, you should have been more observant, but he shouldn't have been undertaking you!

Speed limiter

Some people say that if they are driving in the middle lane at the speed limit (usually 70 mph), then that's OK, because no one in the inside lane should be going any faster than that. Effectively they propose that they are helping other people to avoid breaking the speed limit.

Setting aside the fact that most people on UK motorways break the speed limit at least by a small amount, this argument doesn't work. I have in the past, half in jest, suggested that the police should decide what is the maximum acceptable speed on a particular road on a particular day and drive their cars in the outside lane at that speed, catching anyone who undertakes them. Now, as I said, that was half in jest but this is essentially the point these people are making, except instead of giving that role to the police, they are taking it upon themselves. It is not their role, nor in their interest to try to enforce the rules of the road for other people. Let's think of some reasons for that:

• You may annoy them and make them even more dangerous to you and other road users than they already are
• You may annoy them to such an extent that they seek retribution, either on the road or at the next motorway services
• Your behaviour may itself be seen as aggressive, and you may leave yourself open to accusations of careless driving

Weaving

Next people argue that by sticking rigidly to the rule of moving back into the inside lane after an overtaking manoeuvre they will be weaving in and out all of the time.

If the space is too small to safely get into, you wouldn't get into it, would you? If the space is only just large enough for safety and you are moving faster than the vehicle ahead of the space, you are still in an overtaking manoeuvre, so you don't need to get into it. It is only when there is a space to your left which you can safely enter and remain in for a reasonable time (granted you will have to decide that for yourself) then you must move into it. You will not be weaving.

Getting stuck

The reverse problem of weaving involves the driver who is keeping to the inside lane but comes up behind slower traffic. He wants to move into the middle lane but can't because there's a stream of traffic to his right. He then uses this as an argument for not keeping to the left next time. I can sympathise with this, and I have to admit when I come across a queue of relatively slow moving traffic in the middle lane, usually with someone at the head lane hogging or making a slow overtaking manoeuvre (I'll get to that in a minute), I will occasionally fall into line. The problem here goes back to what I said about people playing by the same rules. If I play this one by the book, which I should do, I know that up to 95% of drivers won't, and that I will get stuck in the inside lane.

So what's the solution? If all drivers were aware of the rule that the inside lane is for driving in, and most (let's not even aim for "all") followed it, then it would work. No one would be boxed in for more than a few seconds except on a very busy road which is in any case a different story (see the quote above from the Highway Code "In congested conditions...").

Slow overtaking

This one seems to be a favourite (not). A vehicle, often a lorry, but it can also be someone who is assumed to in a car with cruise control, is overtaking another vehicle with a very small closing speed. The manoeuvre can take a while, and may even fail if they reach a hill and the comparative power of the two vehicles is against the over-taker.

Let's get cruise control out of the way first. I have it on my car and I use it. I even sometimes go in for these slow overtakes but, if someone comes up behind me, I either accelerate slightly to get past faster, or slow down slightly and give up for now. Either way, I can resume my original speed when the other vehicle has passed.

Now on to lorries, or actually any speed limited vehicle. They are not allowed in the outside lane of the motorway (yes, I've seen them there too but generally they comply). They may be going significantly more slowly than the other traffic but they still have the right to be on the road. What's more, they are usually professional drivers with a schedule to keep (yes, you might also fit into that category). Let's just let them get on with it, let them maintain their speed and get round them - there's always the outside lane, even if it means joining a queue (see "getting stuck" above). And for a lorry to maintain a constant speed saves fuel, which is better for the planet and we all benefit.

Conclusion

By all means campaign for a change in the highway code, I might even support you, but in the meantime just let's all play by the rules set out in the Highway Code, then we can all get on better and make it to our destinations faster and more safely. Yes, I said faster.

There was a feature on a TV programme a few years ago where several families went on the same long motorway run. They were given different strategies: keep left, keep to your lane, and weave I think. If I remember correctly they all arrived at their destination in similar times but if we all play by the same rules the average journey time should fall.

For the record and in case anyone remembers the same TV article, I think another variable was introduced, which was time of departure which I believe had far more bearing on journey time.