Only one EV charger at home?!...

[rbowman]

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise. When they were jammed up completely, which was
the default state around Boston, right of way was determined by testicular
fortitude or, perhaps in the case of women, obliviousness to pending
disaster. Having a larger, older vehicle like a \'59 Cadillac with
significant body damage helped.

 

[Scott Lurndal]

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise.

That was apparently a study failure on your part. The rule in MA
has always been that traffic already in a roundabout has the right-of-way;
traffic in roteries depends on site signage, most are signed that incoming
traffic must yield.

 

[Peeler]

On 12 Jun 2023 19:18:55 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> In the \'70s I had

Oh, NO! Gossip girl is at it again...

<FLUSH rest of the inevitable blather by the self-admiring senile Yankeetard
unread again>

--
More of the resident senile gossip\'s absolutely idiotic endless blather
about herself:
\"My family and I traveled cross country in \'52, going out on the northern
route and returning mostly on Rt 66. We also traveled quite a bit as the
interstates were being built. It might have been slower but it was a lot
more interesting. Even now I prefer what William Least Heat-Moon called
the blue highways but it\'s difficult. Around here there are remnants of
the Mullan Road as frontage roads but I-90 was laid over most of it so
there is no continuous route. So far 93 hasn\'t been destroyed.\"
MID: <kae9ivF7suU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Ian Jackson]

In message <frKhM.16126$sXTc.15557@fx11.iad>, Scott Lurndal
<scott@slp53.sl.home> writes

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise.

That was apparently a study failure on your part. The rule in MA
has always been that traffic already in a roundabout has the right-of-way;
traffic in roteries depends on site signage, most are signed that incoming
traffic must yield.

Without checking, I\'m not sure when we first had roundabouts (full-size
and mini) in the UK. However, with very few exceptions, the rule has
always been \'priority to traffic on your right\'. As we drive on the
left, and circulate clockwise, this means that traffic on the roundabout
has priority, and traffic on the left (entering the roundabout) must
give way. [There are some rare, well-marked exceptions.]

I don\'t know when Continental Europe (where, like the USA, they drive on
the right) adopted roundabouts, but historically, in many countries,
they had a legendary \'priority to the right\' rule for all road
junctions. This meant that you could be hacking along a major road, and
someone could come straight into your path from a side-road on the
right. This meant that traffic already circulating anti-clockwise on a
roundabout had to give way to traffic entering (from the right). The
obvious consequence was that a busy roundabout could soon seize up
solid. [I recall being obliged to drive three times around the Arc de
Triomphe in Paris before being able to peal off down one of the side
roads.]

In more recent years, the European \'priority to the right\' rule was
relaxed and replaced. On roundabouts, traffic on a roundabout now
usually does have priority, and traffic joining or crossing main roads
no longer are allowed to barge in from the right. However, in the
absence of signs specifically indicating that the \'priority to the
right\' rule does not apply, \'priority to the right\' is still the default
situation.
--
Ian
Aims and ambitions are neither attainments nor achievements

 

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-06-12, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 13:56:13 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:

But what could we offer them in return? I believe the Americans are
rather suspicious of alien imports (especially the new-fangled thing
called \'The Roundabout\') .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latham_Circle

It depends on what you mean by \'roundabout\'. The US has had rotaries for
decades. The local government has been on a roundabout kick. Many timid
drivers treat them like a four way stop

We\'ve got roundabouts at intersections that are so busy, it can take
some waiting for traffic already _in_ the roundabout to clear. I\'ve
seen traffic lined up six or more cars deep and two lanes wide.

I don\'t mind navigating them on weekdays, when everybody on the
road is a \"pro\". On weekends, when the working people come out
to shop at Costco, it\'s amateur hour.

defeating the purpose, or navigate
them at 15 mph. I treat them as challenging chicanes.

Considering the speed limit in our roundabouts is 15 mph, I don\'t
grudge anybody doing that speed.

--
Cindy Hamilton

 

[Bob F]

On 6/12/2023 5:56 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message
1662384064.708249629.795394.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>,
Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> writes


There seem to be
quite a few US driving rules that could be usefully adopted here (but
almost certainly never will be).

\'Left turn on red\' (obviously left in the UK) would be one of them.

But what could we offer them in return? I believe the Americans are
rather suspicious of alien imports (especially the new-fangled thing
called \'The Roundabout\') .

They are showing up rapidly here in WA state.

 

[Bob F]

On 6/12/2023 8:39 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <keopp8Fj6o3U1@mid.individual.net>, S Viemeister
firstname@lastname.oc.ku> writes
On 12/06/2023 13:56, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message
1662384064.708249629.795394.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> writes

There seem to be
quite a few US driving rules that could be usefully adopted here (but
almost certainly never will be).

\'Left turn on red\' (obviously left in the UK) would be one of them.
 But what could we offer them in return? I believe the Americans are
rather suspicious of alien imports (especially the new-fangled thing
called \'The Roundabout\') .

Some parts of the US have had roundabouts, AKA \'traffic circles\' for
decades.

Yes, I know - but many drivers still can\'t get the hang of them.
Mini-roundabouts don\'t exist, and they still prefer the \'Four Way Stop\'

They are all over the place here.

https://www.dmlawusa.com/blog/2022/september/rules-of-a-four-way-stop/
I understand that these are excellent sites for playing games of
\'Chicken\', and keep the lawyers in constant business with all the
drivers suing each other.

 

[rbowman]

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 21:18:06 GMT, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

defeating the purpose, or navigate them at 15 mph. I treat them as
challenging chicanes.

Considering the speed limit in our roundabouts is 15 mph, I don\'t grudge
anybody doing that speed.

There is an advisory 15 mph but considering the two I have to navigate
most frequently were plonked down in the middle of a 45 mph road they are
a serious obstacle to traffic. To add to the clown show the street that
really needed some sort of traffic control wasn\'t included in the rotary
so now it will still have cars backed up.

They striped the rotaries last week making them even more ludicrous as
they tried to create two lanes, one being a left turn in a very small
diameter. They\'ll probably be universally ignored. One of the other
rotaries does have a left hand lane that doesn\'t enter the rotary at all.

I can\'t wait to see what they do to the bike path.

 

[Peeler]

On 13 Jun 2023 04:25:18 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> I can\'t wait to see what they do to the bike path.

I certainly CAN wait till the moment when you will tell everyone again in
your ridiculous high-flown grandiloquent style about what they did to the
bike path, you pathological bigmouth.

--
Yet more of the abnormal senile gossiping by the resident senile gossip:
\"I never understood how they made a living but the space where the local
party store was is now up for lease. It probably was more than helium. I
often walk over the the adjacent market to get something for dinner and
people stuffing balloons in their cars was a common sight. No more. I\'ve
no idea if there is another store in town.\"
MID: <kafs2nF6vi1U15@mid.individual.net>

 

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-06-13, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 21:18:06 GMT, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

defeating the purpose, or navigate them at 15 mph. I treat them as
challenging chicanes.

Considering the speed limit in our roundabouts is 15 mph, I don\'t grudge
anybody doing that speed.

There is an advisory 15 mph but considering the two I have to navigate
most frequently were plonked down in the middle of a 45 mph road they are
a serious obstacle to traffic.

The one I\'m thinking of is at the intersection of two 45-mph roads.
It\'s much less of an obstacle to traffic than the previous traffic
signal was. At rush hour, you previously were guaranteed a half-mile
backup at the light.

--
Cindy Hamilton

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 12/06/2023 18:03, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 16:39:19 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:

Yes, I know - but many drivers still can\'t get the hang of them.
Mini-roundabouts don\'t exist, and they still prefer the \'Four Way Stop\'

Some of the residential intersections have adopted mini-roundabouts.
Essentially you take a normal intersection and plant flowers in the
middle. The flowers tend to have a hard life since you can\'t really
navigate it with anything larger than a passenger car.

Most of the affected intersections were either two-way stops or no stop
signs at all. On narrow residential streets where typical speeds are 25
mph or less drivers seem to have been able to work out negotiating
unsigned intersections without running into each other.

They work best where traffic density is high and all roads leading to
them have approximately equal traffic.

The theory is that the rules are very simple. Give way to traffic on the
roundabout. This is a lot easier than a 4 way stop.

And in light traffic they do not result in a mandatory stop either.

Used for their own sake in inappropiate locations they are crap.

--
\"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) \"

Alan Sokal

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 12/06/2023 20:18, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise. When they were jammed up completely, which was
the default state around Boston, right of way was determined by testicular
fortitude or, perhaps in the case of women, obliviousness to pending
disaster. Having a larger, older vehicle like a \'59 Cadillac with
significant body damage helped.

Ah, the French have the best example of that in Paris. I think its
called La Peripherique Interieur or something.

Prioritée à droit rules. So people have more right to get on it, than
those already on it.

Naturally it is a complete clusterfuck.



--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

\"Saki\"

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 12/06/2023 21:31, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <frKhM.16126$sXTc.15557@fx11.iad>, Scott Lurndal
scott@slp53.sl.home> writes
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first
versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was
traffic
must go counterclockwise.

That was apparently a study failure on your part.  The rule in MA
has always been that traffic already in a roundabout has the
right-of-way;
traffic in roteries depends on site signage, most are signed that
incoming
traffic must yield.

Without checking, I\'m not sure when we first had roundabouts (full-size
and mini) in the UK. However, with very few exceptions, the rule has
always been \'priority to traffic on your right\'. As we drive on the
left, and circulate clockwise, this means that traffic on the roundabout
has priority, and traffic on the left (entering the roundabout) must
give way. [There are some rare, well-marked exceptions.]

I cannot remember a time without roundabouts so it must be earlier than
around 1955...

DOT says 1956, but I lived on a roundaboiut as the turnaround end of a
private road cul de sac from 1953, and no one went round that the \'wrong
way\'

I don\'t know when Continental Europe (where, like the USA, they drive on
the right) adopted roundabouts, but historically, in many countries,
they had a legendary \'priority to the right\' rule for all road
junctions. This meant that you could be hacking along a major road, and
someone could come straight into your path from a side-road on the
right. This meant that traffic already circulating anti-clockwise on a
roundabout had to give way to traffic entering (from the right). The
obvious consequence was that a busy roundabout could soon seize up
solid. [I recall being obliged to drive three times around the Arc de
Triomphe in Paris before being able to peal off down one of the side
roads.]

Yep, BTDTGTTS. To ceate a fuckup takes a bureaucrat, To create a world
class clusterfuck takes a French bureaucrat...They now work for the EU.

In more recent years, the European \'priority to the right\' rule was
relaxed and replaced. On roundabouts, traffic on a roundabout now
usually does have priority, and traffic joining or crossing main roads
no longer are allowed to barge in from the right. However, in the
absence of signs specifically indicating that the \'priority to the
right\' rule does not apply, \'priority to the right\' is still the default
situation.

Which is fun when you are barrelling down a dual carriageway at 115mph
and some Belgian decides to pull out on to it, and then panic and start
changing lanes randomly in an effort to get out of your way. I didn\'t
care if I passed right or left, but a weaving car presented a problem...



--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 12/06/2023 22:18, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

On 2023-06-12, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 13:56:13 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:

But what could we offer them in return? I believe the Americans are
rather suspicious of alien imports (especially the new-fangled thing
called \'The Roundabout\') .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latham_Circle

It depends on what you mean by \'roundabout\'. The US has had rotaries for
decades. The local government has been on a roundabout kick. Many timid
drivers treat them like a four way stop

We\'ve got roundabouts at intersections that are so busy, it can take
some waiting for traffic already _in_ the roundabout to clear. I\'ve
seen traffic lined up six or more cars deep and two lanes wide.

During some fuel crisis or other a roundabout was blocked by traffic
queuing to visit a supermarket with fuel available. I couldn\'t get
round it, so I waited, then looked at the queues preventing even a blues
and twos from navigating it and noting my desired exit road was in fact
empty, drove my Defender over the grassy top of it.
One of the more satisfying moments of my life, and the tyre tracks
lasted for weeks...

I don\'t mind navigating them on weekdays, when everybody on the
road is a \"pro\". On weekends, when the working people come out
to shop at Costco, it\'s amateur hour.

defeating the purpose, or navigate
them at 15 mph. I treat them as challenging chicanes.

Considering the speed limit in our roundabouts is 15 mph, I don\'t
grudge anybody doing that speed.

Blimey.

I overtake more cars on roundabouts than on the dual carriageways
leading up to them.

It is a matter of pride to take than at around 50mph. What else is a
sports saloon for? Brakes waste fuel.



--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

 

[NY]

\"The Natural Philosopher\" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:u69c6s$3hshm$1@dont-email.me...

On 12/06/2023 18:03, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 16:39:19 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:

Yes, I know - but many drivers still can\'t get the hang of them.
Mini-roundabouts don\'t exist, and they still prefer the \'Four Way Stop\'

Some of the residential intersections have adopted mini-roundabouts.
Essentially you take a normal intersection and plant flowers in the
middle. The flowers tend to have a hard life since you can\'t really
navigate it with anything larger than a passenger car.

Most of the affected intersections were either two-way stops or no stop
signs at all. On narrow residential streets where typical speeds are 25
mph or less drivers seem to have been able to work out negotiating
unsigned intersections without running into each other.

They work best where traffic density is high and all roads leading to them
have approximately equal traffic.

The theory is that the rules are very simple. Give way to traffic on the
roundabout. This is a lot easier than a 4 way stop.

And in light traffic they do not result in a mandatory stop either.

Used for their own sake in inappropiate locations they are crap.

The problem with mini roundabouts is their very small radius so they are
very tight. Essentially a white disc is painted on a road whose kerbs are
designed for a cross roads, so you need to slow to a crawl to turn very hard
left to get onto the roundabout and then very hard right to go round it, and
then very hard left to leave. Ok, so a lot of people drive over the painted
disc, using it as a means to establish priority while still allowing you to
take the normal straight-on or turn-right path that you would take at a
cross roads. When the disc is painted, that it OK in the Highway Code, but
some roundabouts are raised and you are supposed (somehow!) to steer round
them.

Larger roundabouts are fine: they work well and (crucially) you don\'t have
to stop completely if you can see that your way is clear; small roundabouts
retro-fitted into unsuitable kerbs are a pain.

And then you have multiple roundabouts. The one in Hemel Hempstead is OK,
because it is arranged predictably and logically, with a mini roundabout at
each entrance to the junction, distributed around a large central roundabout
that you may negotiate in either direction, using which ever is the shorter
route. The \"Magic Roundabout\" in Swindon is a dangerous mess, because the
roundabouts are plonked at random and there is no recovery route if you go
the wrong way, whereas a conventional roundabout allows you to go round
again if you have missed your turning. Any fool can improve road safety by
forcing traffic to slow to a crawl because of confusion or tight turns; it
takes skill to design a junction which causes minimal queuing and
maintaining good throughput of traffic.

I used to live in Bracknell and it was said that the Transport and Road
Research Laboratory in Crowthorne, nearby, used Bracknell to experiment with
roundabout design. There was one roundabout (I forget which one) which was a
rounded square, with a point at each entry, so if you wanted to go 3/4 round
it, you had to keep moving your steering wheel back and forth to go round an
island which was not a constant radius of curvature.


Anything is better than the American four-way-stop junctions. They fail
badly (as far as I am concerned) for two reasons: they force everyone to
stop even if there is no other traffic; they rely on *time* of arrival to
determine who goes next, whereas UK junctions always use *position* (traffic
on minor road gives way to traffic on major road, or traffic wanting to
enter a roundabout gives way to traffic coming from the right which is
already on the roundabout). The best junctions are those where everyone can
agree who has priority over whom, based on position and road markings; the
worst (which we mostly avoid in the UK) is a junction where everyone has
equal priority and no-one has a f-ing clue who should go next. At least all
(most) cross roads in the UK which don\'t have lights or a roundabout have a
clearly defined and marked/signed major road and minor road. not a meeting
of two roads of equal status which is a recipe for a free-for-all.


I was watching a driver\'s eye view of a car journey in the early 60s and at
one roundabout the driver commented that he would go ahead and not give way
to traffic from his left. Looks as if the priority-from-the-right rule at
roundabouts was less well understood in those days. He made it sound as if
in those days it was a matter of courtesy who went first, rather than a rule
that was defined in the Highway Code.

There was a junction (Ryde seafront, on the Isle of Wight) always caught me
out because I saw it as a roundabout and then had to think \"on this
occasion, priority from the right does *not* apply\". I think it was this one
https://goo.gl/maps/YjwzFiEKv92xPs5d8 which would seem to have been
redesigned since I was last there - or maybe I\'ve not got the correct
location.

 

[Ian Jackson]

In message <u69cfp$3hshm$2@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> writes

On 12/06/2023 20:18, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first
versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.
In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries
and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise. When they were jammed up completely, which was
the default state around Boston, right of way was determined by testicular
fortitude or, perhaps in the case of women, obliviousness to pending
disaster. Having a larger, older vehicle like a \'59 Cadillac with
significant body damage helped.

Ah, the French have the best example of that in Paris. I think its
called La Peripherique Interieur or something.

Prioritée à droit rules. So people have more right to get on it, than
those already on it.

Naturally it is a complete clusterfuck.

Are you sure? Even the French have realised that \'Priorité à droit\' no
longer works, and many junctions have a \'Vous n\'avez pas priorité\', or a
\'Priorité à droit\' sign with a red line through it. The time you really
need to be careful is on the minor roads and in urban back-streets,
where the dreaded \'Priorité à droit\' still rules supreme.
--
Ian
Aims and ambitions are neither attainments nor achievements

 

[NY]

\"The Natural Philosopher\" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:u69cfp$3hshm$2@dont-email.me...

On 12/06/2023 20:18, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was traffic
must go counterclockwise. When they were jammed up completely, which was
the default state around Boston, right of way was determined by
testicular
fortitude or, perhaps in the case of women, obliviousness to pending
disaster. Having a larger, older vehicle like a \'59 Cadillac with
significant body damage helped.

When I drove in Massachusetts (small towns north of Boston, Boston itself,
journey to/from Cape Cod) in 2000, rotaries were very rare. Normally you
came off a \"motorway\" and the slip road ended at a T junction where you had
to wait for f-ing ages until both directions were clear so you could turn
left to join the traffic on the road that crossed the motorway. The only
rotary that I remember was the one at the \"entrance\" to Cape Cod, which was
a large multi-lane roundabout which was perfectly easy as long as you just
did a mirror image of what you\'d do in the UK: priority to traffic from the
left. I tackled this without any problem and made my way along the road
towards the tip of the Cape. When I stopped at a roadside cafe, a guy got
out of the car behind me and came across to me: he was gobsmacked that I\'d
managed to go straight round the roundabout and made it look so easy. Then
he heard my English accent and he said \"Gee, you\'re not even American -
you\'re used to driving on the other side of the road\", and he virtually
bowed at my feet in obeisance. ;-) \"Yeah, but I\'m crap at 4-way-stop
junctions, so I think we\'ll call it quits\" I replied.

I hadn\'t realised that there wasn\'t a priority-from-the-left rule defined in
their equivalent of the Highway Code. Perhaps I should have been a bit more
cautious and not *assumed* that traffic which wanted to join would wait for
me when I was on the roundabout...

 

[Ian Jackson]

In message <u69cuh$3hshm$3@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> writes

On 12/06/2023 21:31, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message <frKhM.16126$sXTc.15557@fx11.iad>, Scott Lurndal
scott@slp53.sl.home> writes
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first
versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.

In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was
traffic
must go counterclockwise.

That was apparently a study failure on your part.  The rule in MA
has always been that traffic already in a roundabout has the
right-of-way;
traffic in roteries depends on site signage, most are signed that
incoming
traffic must yield.

Without checking, I\'m not sure when we first had roundabouts
(full-size and mini) in the UK. However, with very few exceptions,
the rule has always been \'priority to traffic on your right\'. As we
drive on the left, and circulate clockwise, this means that traffic
on the roundabout has priority, and traffic on the left (entering the
roundabout) must give way. [There are some rare, well-marked exceptions.]

I cannot remember a time without roundabouts so it must be earlier
than around 1955...

DOT says 1956, but I lived on a roundaboiut as the turnaround end of a
private road cul de sac from 1953, and no one went round that the
\'wrong way\'


I don\'t know when Continental Europe (where, like the USA, they drive
on the right) adopted roundabouts, but historically, in many
countries, they had a legendary \'priority to the right\' rule for all
road junctions. This meant that you could be hacking along a major
road, and someone could come straight into your path from a side-road
on the right. This meant that traffic already circulating
anti-clockwise on a roundabout had to give way to traffic entering
(from the right). The obvious consequence was that a busy roundabout
could soon seize up solid. [I recall being obliged to drive three
times around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris before being able to peal
off down one of the side roads.]

Yep, BTDTGTTS. To ceate a fuckup takes a bureaucrat, To create a world
class clusterfuck takes a French bureaucrat...They now work for the EU.


In more recent years, the European \'priority to the right\' rule was
relaxed and replaced. On roundabouts, traffic on a roundabout now
usually does have priority, and traffic joining or crossing main roads
no longer are allowed to barge in from the right. However, in the
absence of signs specifically indicating that the \'priority to the
right\' rule does not apply, \'priority to the right\' is still the
default situation.

Which is fun when you are barrelling down a dual carriageway at 115mph
and some Belgian decides to pull out on to it, and then panic and start
changing lanes randomly in an effort to get out of your way. I didn\'t
care if I passed right or left, but a weaving car presented a problem...

IIRC, the Arc de Triomphe (Place de l\'Etoile) roundabout was sanitized
about 30 years ago. Also, these days you\'re unlikely to find \'priority
to the right\' on busy roads.
--
Ian
Aims and ambitions are neither attainments nor achievements

 

[NY]

\"Ian Jackson\" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:guTyWnCrwDikFwMd@brattleho.plus.com...

Are you sure? Even the French have realised that \'Priorité à droit\' no
longer works, and many junctions have a \'Vous n\'avez pas priorité\', or a
\'Priorité à droit\' sign with a red line through it. The time you really
need to be careful is on the minor roads and in urban back-streets, where
the dreaded \'Priorité à droit\' still rules supreme.

I\'m not sure what the French were smoking when they came up with the rule
that a minor road or farm track has priority over a major road.

New Zealand and/or Australia has a rule that oncoming traffic which wants to
turn right (your left) across your path into a minor road has priority over
you. That is almost as bad, but at least it is visible from a distance so
you can lift off the power to create a bit of space ahead of you to let it
happen, whereas traffic on a French side road may be obscured by
hedges/fences.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 13/06/2023 10:51, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <u69cfp$3hshm$2@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
tnp@invalid.invalid> writes
On 12/06/2023 20:18, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 17:32:27 +0100, SteveW wrote:

I think that they were initially against the idea, as the first
versions
were very different to ours, with cars on the roundabout having to give
way to those entering - leading to no end of chaos and accidents.
 In the \'70s I had to get a Massachusetts drivers license. Rotaries and
roundabouts were very popular in that state and in studying for the
written exam I was surprised to find that the only regulation was
traffic
must go counterclockwise. When they were jammed up completely, which was
the default state around Boston, right of way was determined by
testicular
fortitude or, perhaps in the case of women, obliviousness to pending
disaster. Having a larger, older vehicle like a \'59 Cadillac with
significant body damage helped.

Ah, the French have the best example of that in Paris. I think its
called La Peripherique Interieur or something.

Prioritée à droit rules. So people have more right to get on it, than
those already on it.

Naturally it is a complete clusterfuck.

Are you sure? Even the French have realised that \'Priorité à droit\' no
longer works, and many junctions have a \'Vous n\'avez pas priorité\', or a
\'Priorité à droit\' sign with a red line through it. The time you really
need to be careful is on the minor roads and in urban back-streets,
where the dreaded \'Priorité à droit\' still rules supreme.

It was in force when I was there, but it was a long time ago.

--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.