What exactly is "left lane blocking"?

Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

> But maybe conditions don't
> allow me to pass faster than 5 mph; conditions that may include but not be
> limited to that speed trap 1/4 ahead that I know about and you don't.

If I knew about a speed trap ¼ mile ahead, I'd just remain in the right
lane.

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>
>> "Arif Khokar" > wrote:
>
>>>>This is not my experience, Arif. If I'm doing 75 and another car passes
>>>>me at 80, they blow past me like a dry leaf in a stiff wind.
>
>>>Then I see the problem as one of two possibilites
>>>
>>>1. You're unable to accurately estimate distance
>>>2. You're unable to accurately estimate closing speed.
>
>> I don't have to estimate anything. My speedometer works fine.
>
> This leads to another two possibilites.
>
> 1. You lack depth perception
> 2. You believe that your speedometer measures the speed of the vehicle
> behind you.

Neither is the case. The second point is just sarcasm on your part.

>> Case in point: I'm coming home from the gig tonight, on a 6 lane freeway,
>> speed limit 55. There's a car in the right lane doing the speed limit
>> and a MLB perhaps 20 feet behind. I'm doing 63 in the right lane. I
>> slow down (by coasting, not braking) and clock the MLB at 55.
>
> There was no need to slow down before passing. Check your mirrors and
> pass before you catch up with them. If there's a faster car that will
> catch up with you before you complete your pass at your current speed,
> then speed up a little bit to complete your pass sooner.

I slowed down to clock the car, not out of concern. I wanted to put the
theories mentioned here to a test.

>>>>It doesn't matter anyway. Change the speeds if you like. The question
>>>>remains the same.
>
>>>My answer is that you should complete the pass before the other car
>>>catches up to you. The easiest way to do that without having to wait for
>>>a long time is to either match or exceed the speed of the vehicle behind
>>>you. Then, after completing your pass, slow down to your previous
>>>cruising speed.
>
>> I'm not going to speed up that fast just to accommodate a speeding
>> driver.
>
> First off, you're not driving anywhere near the limit of safety. I
> typically cruise between 80 and 85 on interstates. That doesn't mean
> that's my limit. I certainly can accelerate and go 100 to 110 for brief
> periods of time if I feel like it without coming anywhere close to
> crashing.

If you want to drive that fast, more power to you. But it's unreasonable to
force other, law-abiding drivers to accommodate your need for speed. If
you'd going 110 in moderate traffic, then you're weaving and changing lanes
a lot.

>> If the car doing 80 has to brake, or any car has to brake on a freeway
>> (except in traffic jams), then there's something horribly wrong. Except
>> in emergencies, no one should ever have to brake on a freeway.
>
> Did you not just contradict yourself? By not waiting or speeding up, you
> ended causing the problem that you stated that no one should ever have to
> experience.

I don't control anybody else's right foot, if that's what you mean. The
example of last night I mentioned above, I already stated I coasted to a
lower speed, not braked. If you meant something else, let me know.

>> The maneuver The others, the impatient lead-foots who can't stand being
>> behind another car will have to wait a few seconds for me to complete my
>> pass.
>
> Who's to say that you're not impatient by not waiting until they've passed
> you? If they're close enough to catch up with you in 11 seconds or less,
> then you could have waited. Otherwise speed up while passing if you don't
> want to wait in situations like that.

In the original example, I've already started my poass when the second car
appeared. My question to Jim then was, should I abort my pass just to
accommodate a lead foot who appeared out of nowhere at a much higher rate of
speed?

>> I'm not out to impede anybody else, not on purpose.
>
> But you don't care if you "incidently" do it.

At some point, Arif, we all impede somebody else. It's bound to happen when
you share the road. What we're discussing is deliberate and malicious
impeding.

>> But at the same time I'm not about to let a hot-shot lead foot dick me
>> around either.
>
> Now we see who's passive agressive here.

You call it being passive-aggressive. I call it not allowing a bully to
push me around. You say potato and I say potahto.

>>>The good thing about it is that you avoided making another driver slow
>>>down, and you completed your pass sooner.
>
>> At the cost of my own safety?
>
> Hardly (see above). If you feel that 63 mph is the absolute upper limit
> of how fast you can drive, then you shouldn't be driving anywhere near
> that fast. On most interstates around here, I feel that absolute upper
> limit of safety is around 130 mph or so. I usually drive 80 to 85.

It depends on the conditions. I've been alone on interstates where 25 mph
is too fast (horizontal snow, fog, and packed snow atop ice on the
pavement). My old SUV tops out at 85 and for 95% of my needs that's more
than enough speed. If I want to drive a lot faster I use my wife's car

>> I think I'll charge him ten seconds instead.
>
> You certainly have an attitude problem.

I guess you can take labels and stick them on anybody by using thumbtacks
and glue. It's a lot easier than rational discussion, and it relieves you
of responsibility.

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>
>> But maybe conditions don't allow me to pass faster than 5 mph; conditions
>> that may include but not be limited to that speed trap 1/4 ahead that I
>> know about and you don't.
>
> If I knew about a speed trap ¼ mile ahead, I'd just remain in the right
> lane.

Arif, did you notice the last three words of my post up there?

"Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
ink.net:

> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
> .. .
>> "Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
>> ink.net:
>>
>>> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
>>> .. .
>>>> "Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
>>>> news >>>>
>>>>> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
>>>>> .. .
>>>>>> "Harry K" > wrote in
>>>>>> oups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> STKR does not
>>>>>>> apply while I am passing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SAYS WHO? It applies ALL the time.
>>>>>> Let's see a cite on that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Two questions, Jim. Both questions presume we're on a freeway,
>>>>> the speed limit is 65, and the car I'm passing at 75 is doing 70:
>>>>>
>>>>> * If I'm alongside a car I'm passing and see your car approaching
>>>>> at 80 from 1/4 mile behind, should I immediately abort my pass,
>>>>> even if it means colliding with the car I'm passing? Or should I
>>>>> immediately slow down to pull into the right lane to allow you to
>>>>> pass first?
>>>>
>>>> You omitted the OTHER option;to speed up and complete the pass
>>>> WITHOUT hindering faster traffic.
>>>> Why would you pull out and knowingly make the other guy brake?
>>>> That's what you propose.
>>>
>>> Actually, Jim, that isn't at all what I proposed. And you doing 80
>>> from 1/4 mile back weren't visible when I started to pass.
>>
>> Then you are taking far longer to pass then proper(or safe).If I'm
>> that far
>> back,you should have had plenty of time to pass.
>
> That's according to your standards of IOTR (I Own The Road) and not
> mine.
>
> Maybe you just didn't check
>> your mirror,or maybe you just decided MFFY.I suspect the latter.
>
> I check my mirror all the time, even when I'm not passing or changing
> lanes. And I don't do MFFY. So you're wrong on both counts.
>
>>>>> * If I'm alongside a car I'm passing and decide to complete my
>>>>> pass even though it impedes you approaching me from 1/4 mile
>>>>> behind at 80, your car is delayed by perhaps 5-8 seconds max.
>>>>> Where is the harm?
>>>>
>>>> You violated the Slower Traffic Keep Right rule(law?).
>>>> The harm is you interfering with the flow of faster traffic,which
>>>> is what the STKR is supposed to prevent.
>>>
>>> The slower traffic is in the right lane.
>>
>> No,the STKR is directed at traffic in the PASSING lane,to have them
>> move over so faster traffic can pass unhindered.
>
> You're confusing STKP with KRETP. I'm passing at a good clip and am
> in the right. You're doing 80 in a 65 zone and am in the wrong in
> this situation.
>
>>> I'm passing him.
>>
>> Which is no exception to the STKR rule.
>
> Again, you're confusing STKR with KRETP.

No,"slower traffic keep right" does not have any exceptions for those
passing too slowly.That's just another form of LLBing under the guise of
passing.

You seem to miss the entire concept of "slower traffic keep right" which is
intended to keep putzes from hindering faster traffic.
>
>>> You're
>>> going 15 mph over the speed limit which will earn you a ticket if
>>> caught. Even if you aren't caught, wouldn't you say a car doing 80
>>> in a 65 zone is a greater hazard to surrounding traffic than a car
>>> passing at a elative 5 mph?
>>
>> No,it's not a greater hazard. Except when folks do not follow the
>> SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT rule,and hinder them.Or when others are not
>> paying attention to their driving.
>
> See above.
>
>>>>> Okay, that's three questions. Whatever. Your response?
>>>> There is is.
>>>>
>>>> I also note there is no cite to support the "ME First,you brake"
>>>> behavior.
>>>
>>> You're admitting facts not in evidence, Jim. It's easy to switch
>>> around the facts to suit your position.
>
>> No,you just keep on tossing out lame attempts at justification for
>> your improper driving.
>
> You're doing 80 in a 65 zone in light to moderate traffic, and I'm the
> improper driver? Maybe you interpret Slower Traffic Keep Right to
> mean All Traffic Keep Right At All Times Except For Jim?

Considering I usually keep to 70mph,and in the right lane,being passed by
most everyone else doing 80 or better,you would be wrong.
(no surprise there)

I suspect you could never drive on any Autobahn,you'd be overwhelmed,and
probably cited by the police for LLBing or obstructing traffic.
Or have a tail of many angry German drivers.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
nk.net:

> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
> .. .
>> DTJ > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:23:12 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is not my experience, Arif. If I'm doing 75 and another car
>>>>passes me at 80, they blow past me like a dry leaf in a stiff wind.
>>>
>>> Here's your sign.
>>>
>>
>> A 5 mph pass is not "blowing past" anyone. Maybe they're getting old.
>> (I'm 52)
>
> You got six years on me, you old fart

I've encountered old young people before,their mind ages before their body.
>
> I'm doing 75, you're doing 80. You're passing at a relative speed of
> 5 mph. Not as fast as 15 mph, which is what I prefer. But maybe
> conditions don't allow me to pass faster than 5 mph; conditions that
> may include but not be limited to that speed trap 1/4 ahead that I
> know about and you don't.

Then move over or keep right,and let me collect my ticket.
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT.
Here you PROVE you're trying to be a traffic enforcer.
>
> If the way ahead is clear and there's a line of cars behind me, I'll
> consider safety of all before inconvenience to me and up my speed to
> complete the pass sooner. But a lead foot who roars up, slams on the
> brakes at the last second (what, he didn't see me?)

What? You didn't see him coming and SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT?
FIVE mph faster is no "leadfoot roaring up",either.
That closure rate would give you plenty of time to do a pass,if you weren't
being obstinant and a traffic enforcer.

>and then tailgates
> me during a pass gets no consideration. I won't enable a sociopath.
>
No sociopath,he's passing and you're LLBing.You would be the sociopath.
You hinder the flow of traffic.
And again,Here you PROVE you're trying to be a traffic enforcer.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Daniel W. Rouse Jr." > wrote in
:

> "Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:56:16 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>> wrote:
>>
> [snip...]
>
>> As simple as this is to do, there are people out there who flat out
>> refuse to touch their gas pedal. They set their cruise control and
>> that's it. I don't understand what the objection is, but it's obvious
>> that it exists.
>>
> Valid reasons are fuel economy (especially with rising gas prices)
> and, of course, compliance with speed laws.
>
>
>

Including SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Yanik wrote:
> "Harry K" > wrote in
> oups.com:
>
> >
> > Jim Yanik wrote:
> >> "Harry K" > wrote in
> >> oups.com:
> >>
> >> >
> >> ><snip a whole bunch>
> >> > --
> >> >> >> Jim Yanik
> >> >> >> jyanik
> >> >> >> at
> >> >> >> kua.net
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And there is another typical MMFFY response. You want to
force
> > me
> >> > to
> >> >> > alter my driving style.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes.
> >> >> Because it is wrong in this case.
> >> >>
> >> >> > That makes you just as much as a MFFY as I am,
> >> >> > actually more so as I have the legal right of way.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually,no you don't,as you are violating the slower traffic
keep
> >> > right
> >> >> rule. Being first (me first) does not negate that rule.
> >> >
> >> > Again, while I am passing I am not the slower traffic.
> >>
> >> If another car is approaching,YES YOU ARE.
> >>
> >> > STKR does not
> >> > apply while I am passing
> >>
> >> SAYS WHO? It applies ALL the time.
> >> Let's see a cite on that.
> >>
> >> > and you can run that by any LE officer,
> >> > traffic safety guy, or driving instructor you like with the
> > possible
> >> > exception of race conditions.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> > I admit that I am a
> >> >> > MFFY in the rare exceptions
> >> >>
> >> >> evidently not so rare.
> >> >>
> >> >> > that I have quoted but I'll bet you can't
> >> >> > look in the mirror and admit you are one too.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Harry K
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Harry K
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to
> >> > brake(change
> >> >> YOUR driving)" shtick.
> >> >> You are.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Jim Yanik
> >> >> jyanik
> >> >> at
> >> >> kua.net
> >> >
> >> > I knew you couldn't do it. I would like you to explain to me
(and
> > the
> >> > others) just -how- is my causing you to slow down any more of a
> > MFFY
> >> > than you causing me to speed up? If it is an imposition on you
to
> > slow
> >> > down, it is an imposition on me to speed up. I asked that
before,
> > got
> >> > no answer and really expect nothing but more hand waving this
time.
> >> >
> >> > Harry K
> >> >
> >> > Harry K
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Once again;
> >> Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to
> > brake(change
> >> YOUR driving)" shtick.
> >> You are.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jim Yanik
> >> jyanik
> >> at
> >> kua.net
> >
> > SOS, same question, same dodge and same no answer to the question.
> > As to the STKR I told you to run it by various authorities if you
> > didn't believe me...you didn't.
> >
> > Harry K
> >
> >
>
> It's your assertion,you provide the cite.
> Don't expect me to do your homework for you.
>
> --
> Jim Yanik
> jyanik
> at
> kua.net

Huh?? YOU claim STKR applies while I am pssing. Up up to YOU to
provide the cite if you need one.

Harry K

Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

> In the original example, I've already started my poass when the second car
> appeared.

Let's see now. Did the car appear out of nowhere? Since that's not
possible then either you failed to check your mirrors before you
initiated the pass, or you're taking quite a long time to complete your
pass.

From the scenario 2 posts upthread, you state that it takes you 10
seconds to pass two vehicles (including the time it took you to
accelerate from 55 to 63 mph).

Given that, I find it hard to believe that you did not see a car that
could catch up to you in just over 10 seconds. Assuming visibility is
about ¼ mile, the car would have to be going about 90 mph faster than
you are to accomplish that. If visibility is 1/8th of a mile, then he
would have to be going about 45 mph faster than you.

I don't know about you, but I don't find vehicles driving 45 to 90 mph
faster than me on a regular basis on any road I've been on.

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .
> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." > wrote in
> :
>
> > "Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:56:16 GMT, Arif Khokar >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> > [snip...]
> >
> >> As simple as this is to do, there are people out there who flat out
> >> refuse to touch their gas pedal. They set their cruise control and
> >> that's it. I don't understand what the objection is, but it's obvious
> >> that it exists.
> >>
> > Valid reasons are fuel economy (especially with rising gas prices)
> > and, of course, compliance with speed laws.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Including SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT.
>
And Jim, where I drive, the only places I see actual "Slower Traffic Keep
Right" signs are on steep grades (e.g., 6% grade or more) with an extra slow
lane that opens up until the steep grade levels off. That includes single
lane roads (in each direction, divided by a double-yellow line or median)
that open up to two lanes, as well as four lane interstates (in each
direction) that open up to five lanes, for those steep grade portions of
road.

Arif Khokar wrote:

> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>
>> In the original example, I've already started my poass when the second
>> car appeared.
>
>
> Let's see now. Did the car appear out of nowhere? Since that's not
> possible then either you failed to check your mirrors before you
> initiated the pass, or you're taking quite a long time to complete your
> pass.
>
> From the scenario 2 posts upthread, you state that it takes you 10
> seconds to pass two vehicles (including the time it took you to
> accelerate from 55 to 63 mph).
>
> Given that, I find it hard to believe that you did not see a car that
> could catch up to you in just over 10 seconds. Assuming visibility is
> about ¼ mile, the car would have to be going about 90 mph faster than
> you are to accomplish that. If visibility is 1/8th of a mile, then he
> would have to be going about 45 mph faster than you.
>
> I don't know about you, but I don't find vehicles driving 45 to 90 mph
> faster than me on a regular basis on any road I've been on.

I have seen it, occasionally. The other night I was heading north on US
301 in Maryland at about 80-85 MPH (posted 65) and while passing a
minivan that was traveling at appx. the speed limit a cop car came up
from behind at appx. 100 MPH. Granted that still is only a 35 MPH
differential between fastest and slowest car but still significant.
(no, no ticket - I got over to the right RFN and the cop kept on going.)

Personally I was curious how he could see well enough to drive that fast
safely as 85 was about the limits of the headlights on the car I was
driving (not my car, long story - the 944 has Cibie E-codes that are
simply amazing) but I wasn't about to flag him down to engage him in a
discussion of outdriving one's lights

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel