Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
2520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 321


  Reply # 1215427 15-Jan-2015 12:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

Look at the very beginning of the video. The Toyota is visible in the windscreen of the OPs car. That was the moment the OP should have slowed to allow the merge.

Hmm, what to write...
992 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 500

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1215447 15-Jan-2015 12:39
Send private message

JWR:
I don't think either car are turning i.e. neither have to cross a centre line.

Therefore, it is a merge.

It is hard to tell. But, it did seem that the other car was ahead. So, you probably should have slowed a little and let him go ahead.

Also, if it was me, I would have been in the left hand lane there. I can't see any reason to be in the right hand lane.


I know merging is mentioned in the road code however there is no such term in the Land Transport (Road User Rule) 2004 therefore you must rely on other rules to make a determination. If we consider the Toyota is on a slip lane (rather than coming off another road and therefore a turn) then the only bit of the rule I can find that applies is:

Section 2.6 (3) A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

This of course only applies once the two lanes become one and since the Toyota ended up in front I would say by definition it passed the other vehicle. and so contravened this section.




Matthew


1738 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 349

Trusted

  Reply # 1215449 15-Jan-2015 12:39
Send private message

Only in NZ do you have traffic  merge lanes on the fastlane / righthand lane of a motorway. Or even exit lanes from the righthand lane. Makes a mockery of the keep left rules.




My thoughts are no longer my own and is probably representative of our media-controlled government


12900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6082

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1215454 15-Jan-2015 12:44
Send private message

mdooher:
JWR:
I don't think either car are turning i.e. neither have to cross a centre line.

Therefore, it is a merge.

It is hard to tell. But, it did seem that the other car was ahead. So, you probably should have slowed a little and let him go ahead.

Also, if it was me, I would have been in the left hand lane there. I can't see any reason to be in the right hand lane.


I know merging is mentioned in the road code however there is no such term in the Land Transport (Road User Rule) 2004 therefore you must rely on other rules to make a determination. If we consider the Toyota is on a slip lane (rather than coming off another road and therefore a turn) then the only bit of the rule I can find that applies is:

Section 2.6 (3) A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

This of course only applies once the two lanes become one and since the Toyota ended up in front I would say by definition it passed the other vehicle. and so contravened this section.


I actually drove that road several times in the last few weeks and it is a definitely a merge  and what is detailed here applies  http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/merging.html

A
 slight reduction in speed would have allowed the Toyota to merge safely and only cost 1/1000th of a second in time




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


Hmm, what to write...
992 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 500

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1215457 15-Jan-2015 12:50
Send private message

KiwiNZ:
mdooher:
JWR:
I don't think either car are turning i.e. neither have to cross a centre line.

Therefore, it is a merge.

It is hard to tell. But, it did seem that the other car was ahead. So, you probably should have slowed a little and let him go ahead.

Also, if it was me, I would have been in the left hand lane there. I can't see any reason to be in the right hand lane.


I know merging is mentioned in the road code however there is no such term in the Land Transport (Road User Rule) 2004 therefore you must rely on other rules to make a determination. If we consider the Toyota is on a slip lane (rather than coming off another road and therefore a turn) then the only bit of the rule I can find that applies is:

Section 2.6 (3) A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

This of course only applies once the two lanes become one and since the Toyota ended up in front I would say by definition it passed the other vehicle. and so contravened this section.


I actually drove that road several times in the last few weeks and it is a definitely a merge  and what is detailed here applies  http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/merging.html


What I am getting at is the road code is just a guide, it is not the law, you don't have to follow it if you don't want to (obviously it makes for a better world when we do)

You can't rely on some pretty picture in the road code when you end up in court.




Matthew


14292 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1849


  Reply # 1215501 15-Jan-2015 13:52
2 people support this post
Send private message

Just rewatching it, I think the toyota was in the right. This is because the OP driver was easily able to see that the toyota was coming up on the right side for a reasoanble period of time, and there would have been a warning of a merge for the OP driver further up the road, so they knew they needed to pay attention, and to merge with traffic from the incoming right lane. So they needed to judge their speed with the car that was about to merge with the lane. The toyota must have also been in front of the other vehicle, as shown in the video, but was travelling slower so the cars nearly ended up in the same space at the same time. Whereas teh OP driver should have slowed down a little to match the toyotas speed.  If the toyota instead had to slow down to merge behind the other vehicle, then it would have had to slow down, and it could have created a dangerous situation, as it would have then been too slow for the lane it was in, and could have caused a nose to tail. If I was in this situation, I would have slowed accordingly to allow the toyota to merge, as it was already ahead when I first saw it near to the merge area.

JWR

738 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 236


  Reply # 1215507 15-Jan-2015 14:19

mattwnz: Just rewatching it, I think the toyota was in the right. This is because the OP driver was easily able to see that the toyota was coming up on the right side for a reasoanble period of time, and there would have been a warning of a merge for the OP driver further up the road, so they knew they needed to pay attention, and to merge with traffic from the incoming right lane. So they needed to judge their speed with the car that was about to merge with the lane. The toyota must have also been in front of the other vehicle, as shown in the video, but was travelling slower so the cars nearly ended up in the same space at the same time. Whereas teh OP driver should have slowed down a little to match the toyotas speed.  If the toyota instead had to slow down to merge behind the other vehicle, then it would have had to slow down, and it could have created a dangerous situation, as it would have then been too slow for the lane it was in, and could have caused a nose to tail. If I was in this situation, I would have slowed accordingly to allow the toyota to merge, as it was already ahead when I first saw it near to the merge area.



The OP actually sped up and tried to head off the other guy.

You can hear the exhaust note change and the GPS-based speed went from 25km/h to 44km/h.

6691 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 576

Trusted

  Reply # 1215508 15-Jan-2015 14:21
Send private message

jarledb:

This is the place... 

I was driving on highway 2, following it. The other person had just gone through the roundabout from highway 50 and was going onto 2.


I know that roundabout, but even before you included the maps link I was going to say that in this case I think you'd look at who was merging.
In your case you on a straight bit of road that is two lanes wide, and they are on a single lane that joins with the main larger road that you are on, so the other lane is doing the merging here, not you.

So my take is that they are merging into your lane and they have to do that safely.
I'm sure there's a bit of guidance somewhere about how to join a motorway for example, which fundamentally applies here (despite this not being labelled a motorway, but you get the idea).

After that you're talking racing incident type rules, whereby if one car is clearly over half ahead then you're not legally allowed to cause an accident by driving into them to prove a point.

6691 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 576

Trusted

  Reply # 1215511 15-Jan-2015 14:25
Send private message

JWR:


The OP actually sped up and tried to head off the other guy.

You can hear the exhaust note change and the GPS-based speed went from 25km/h to 44km/h.


I don't think the change in speed is based on cutting off the other guy.  There is a corner for both of the two main lanes prior to this merging location.
Drivers in either of the two main lanes would be slowing for the corner and would be naturally speeding up coming out of it anyway.

4969 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2021


  Reply # 1215521 15-Jan-2015 15:16
Send private message

From the road transport rule (road user) 2004: -

27  A driver must not pass or attempt to pass on the right of another vehicle moving in the same direction when ....

 

  •  

     ....(b) approaching or passing a flush median, unless the driver—

     

       

    •  

      (i) intends to turn right from the road marked with the flush median into another road or vehicle entrance; or

       

       

    •  

      (ii) has turned right onto the road marked with the flush median; or

       

       

    •  

      (iii) can make the entire movement without encroaching on the flush median

       

Technically I would argue: -
- If the Toyota encroached on the flush median at all, they are in the wrong. 
- The Toyota is they are (via a short road from a side the roundabout) entering the road that runs along side the roundabout, and which the OP is already on the OP is on

From a pragmatic point of view, I think both parties could have driven better. 

Both cars are accelerating toward the merge point.  This makes it more difficult for either driver to judge the merge well, as it's difficult to predict the acceleration of another vehicle. If either vehicle had maintained constant speed rather than accelerating to reach the merge point first, the whole situation could have been avoided.

IMHO it's a shared fail.




Mike



Webhead
2090 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 675

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1215523 15-Jan-2015 15:21
Send private message

I don't think I am infallible. and I would have probably been better to move over to the left lane. BUT, there was no race here. I was coming through the turn and had to slow down before the turn to wait for the train crossing barrier that had just gone up.

I was driving on Highway 2 that was taking a left turn and I was accelerating to the speed limit in a normal way, was not in a race or trying to get before the Toyota.

My understanding of the situation was that the Toyota was coming out of the roundabout and entering into highway 2, and therfore had to yield to me. But I am starting to understand from the discussions here that its not that clear cut. Will be looking out extra carefully in these types of intersections in the future.




12900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6082

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1215525 15-Jan-2015 15:24
Send private message

jarledb: I don't think I am infallible. and I would have probably been better to move over to the left lane. BUT, there was no race here. I was coming through the turn and had to slow down before the turn to wait for the train crossing barrier that had just gone up.

I was driving on Highway 2 that was taking a left turn and I was accelerating to the speed limit in a normal way, was not in a race or trying to get before the Toyota.

My understanding of the situation was that the Toyota was coming out of the roundabout and entering into highway 2, and therfore had to yield to me. But I am starting to understand from the discussions here that its not that clear cut. Will be looking out extra carefully in these types of intersections in the future.


I will say that the intersection in question is poorly designed and some what ambiguous 




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 




Webhead
2090 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 675

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1215527 15-Jan-2015 15:32
Send private message

mattwnz:
... and there would have been a warning of a merge for the OP driver further up the road, so they knew they needed to pay attention


Knock yourself out looking for that sign. https://www.google.co.nz/maps/@-39.492134,176.892132,3a,75y,347.05h,96.78t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s4W3W87X9RFcTKM5vhYL_IA!2e0




2365 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1096

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1215536 15-Jan-2015 15:41
Send private message

I err slightly in favour of the Corolla (as was on OP right and OP did speed up at point of merge), but agree it's a tough call and I might be wrong. Luckily for both drivers, insurers didn't have to view the dash cam to arrive at a definitive answer!

gzt

10129 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1545


  Reply # 1215537 15-Jan-2015 15:45
Send private message

The geekzone page composition finds Jarledb guilty of posting a long link without inlining and therefore messing up the page formatting. It finds Jaxson to be his unwitting accomplice quoting the same link. Where's Peter Reader when you need him? ; ).

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.