10 September 2007
Lorry responses at different speeds
Four weeks ago I made a small complaint about the way many heavy lorries behaved on dual carriageways.
I observed that they signalled and pulled out without any regard to what was coming up behind and then took an eternity to pass the HGV in front, thus dangerously disrupting traffic.
As I might have anticipated, I received quite a response from readers. Amusingly, the quickest of them shot in at speed from car-driving supporters of my views, while the complaints from the heavy lorry drivers took a bit longer to reach me – presumably hampered by speed limiters of some kind.
More than one person, in fact, pointed out in defence of HGV drivers that their engines were speed-limited, which prevented them overtaking more quickly. Fair enough. But surely they are aware of this, which means they know very well that it will take ages to overtake - so they must be being deliberately obstructive.
There is still a way round it: the lorry being overtaken could easily slow down slightly to allow the overtaker to get past. Instead, the intention invariably seems to be to make it as hard as possible – in some cases forcing the frustrated overtaker, after three or four miles of blockading the outside lane, to drop back.
But no-one likes being overtaken, do they? One lorry enthusiast seemed to feel that it was OK to block cars because they were exceeding the speed limit. But the self- appointed speed-limit-enforcer is to my mind one of the most dangerous characters on the road, whatever he or she drives. “They shall not pass” is a killer attitude. Literally.
I had a great deal of sympathy, though, with one lorry driver who wrote to me, no doubt representative of very many others. He pointed out the commercial pressure that lorry drivers were under - ”nearly all subject to time-sensitive deliveries…they receive abuse and wait for hours to get unloaded, hence they have to go like hell to play catch-up”. He blames “rich developers and greedy investors”, with a resultant emphasis on quantity instead of quality. I would not want to argue with that. The menace to road safety does not even have to be on the road.
Nor would I want to restrict my criticism of inconsiderate driving to lorry drivers. Drivers of cars and vans (especially white ones) have been quick to follow suit. On journeys to and from Scotland in the past month I saw countless drivers of all vehicles who seem to think that as long as they indicate, they can pull out, and it is up to the driver behind to make room.
This is kamikaze driving. How about a national campaign to expose it?
Mystery animals slow down traffic
Still on the lookout for strange road signs, I was much taken by one I came across on two different motorways recently. It flashed from one of those huge LCD displays that give warning of temporary hazards: “Animals on the road.”
It certainly made people slow down – largely, I think, because of the uncertainty as to the nature of the animals. What were we being faced with? Escaped hippopotami? Horses? A couple of coypu and a stray squirrel?
In the end, of course, no animal was visible. I could picture the sign-operator gurgling with delight and trying to think of something even more bizarre to slow down traffic. “Birds crossing sky”, for instance.
I am happy to report that my favourite Scottish road sign is still there: “No double white lines in centre of road.” But it has been superseded in pointlessness by one on the M6 toll: “This sign not in use.” Almost as good as the legendary “Do not throw stones at this sign”.
BBC steps back from climate bandwagon
I was delighted to see that the BBC has decided not to jump full-square on the global warming bandwagon. It has dropped plans to broadcast Planet Relief, described as a TV special on climate change, following comments by senior editorial staff that it was not the BBC’s job to save the planet or to lead opinion on the subject.
This is a refreshing stance at a time when so many parts of the media have abandoned all pretext of objectivity. Whatever climate change enthusiasts may say, there is still a great deal of work to do on establishing how our climate is changed, and even more on predicting its future. Those who prepared for a really, really hot summer this year will know what I mean.
The sole function of conclusions in this area is apparently to be leapt to, but awkward data keep cropping up. The only UK September heatwaves (over 90F) in the twentieth century occurred in 1906, 1911, 1919, 1926, 1929 and 1949, and there have been none this century, according to expert Philip Eden. Wait for it…
It's OK to walk without a dog
Having incurred the wrath of lorry drivers, I’ve decided to go the whole hog and annoy a completely new group of people by backing the move to ban dog-walking in wildlife conservation areas.
Apparently dog-walking causes a dramatic drop in the number of birds, even if the pets are kept on a lead.
As a big bird enthusiast (I know what you’re thinking) I would like to see all dog- walking banned everywhere, but this is not a popular position to take. After all, dog-walkers now have those delightful little transparent plastic bags in which to carry round their pets’ poo so that we don’t have to tread in it.
Aesthetically, however, this is not much of an improvement. I sometimes think I would rather it were on the ground.
But dogs have to be walked, don’t they? If so, I prefer it to be done in private. Up and down the stairs is good, or round and round the patio.
I suspect that the real reason people own dogs is to give themselves an excuse to go for a walk.
I have good news for them: it is perfectly OK to go for a walk on your own. If enough of us do it, we won’t be mistaken for flashers, cruisers or potential rapists and it will become a socially accepted practice. Then there will be no need for dogs at all.