Cyclone Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 WarPig, that roundabout has the same traffic filter back out here from the A61S lane to an M1 N lane. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3837744,-1.460655,3a,75y,116.65h,69.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OUehiY1cpaWmKq3t6nj_Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 The inner lane actually splits into 3, but it doesn't force you to cross any white lines by doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikeachu Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 WarPig, that roundabout has the same traffic filter back out here from the A61S lane to an M1 N lane. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3837744,-1.460655,3a,75y,116.65h,69.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3OUehiY1cpaWmKq3t6nj_Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 The inner lane actually splits into 3, but it doesn't force you to cross any white lines by doing so. I think Warpig is pointing out that the centre lane on approach is marked M1, but that lane guides you onto the A61S and away from the M1 when you actually enter the roundabout. If you needed the M1 and took the centre lane approach you would need to change lanes into the path of traffic that took the left hand lane approach and slow down to do so, impeding the flow of traffic behind that wants the A61S exit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 (edited) It's different to the issue at Meadowhall though, where the arrow indicates straight on, but the roundabout markings actually indicate something different. At Park Square the arrow indicates straight on, and you can achieve that without ever crossing a lane marking. You would NOT need to change lanes, the lane you are in splits (into 3), you can see it in the links I posted. The traffic that uses the left hand lane never conflicts with the traffic using the 2nd M1N lane. ---------- Post added 25-05-2017 at 09:48 ---------- https://ibb.co/ipTaca I've added the path taken to this google satellite image to illustrate. Edited May 25, 2017 by Cyclone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikeachu Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 (edited) It's different to the issue at Meadowhall though, where the arrow indicates straight on, but the roundabout markings actually indicate something different. At Park Square the arrow indicates straight on, and you can achieve that without ever crossing a lane marking. You would NOT need to change lanes, the lane you are in splits (into 3), you can see it in the links I posted. The traffic that uses the left hand lane never conflicts with the traffic using the 2nd M1N lane. Yes, I see that lane 1 splits into three. These three lanes take you in the direction of the M1. But the issue with this approach is lane 2 markings. Lane 2, also labelled M1 on approach, takes you on to the roundabout. You cannot go towards the M1 from Lane 2 without changing lanes - despite it being marked M1 on approach. https://ibb.co/ipTaca I've added the path taken to this google satellite image to illustrate. This is a different approach to the one shown in the google street view. Edited May 25, 2017 by spikeachu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 (edited) Apologies, you're correct, I was looking at the wrong entrance. The lane markings on the roundabout don't match the words on the road as Warpig said for the commercial street entrance. Edited May 25, 2017 by Cyclone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC89216 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 5 days ago somebody in this thread said they're leaving it and not posting anymore. He's still here posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 I've just accepted that I'm right, that there's no cure for stupid, some people aren't for turning regardless of the evidence laid before them and I've moved on. I've also decided to get a dash cam - i think this thread proves their worth. I'm afraid that I've got to disagree that this thread proves that dash cams are useful. People have interpreted the footage of this particular incident in whichever way they deem fit, proof and facts have had little bearing on people's views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Presumably the police, insurance companies and CPS are more skilled at understanding who should be driving where and apportioning blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikeachu Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 I'm afraid that I've got to disagree that this thread proves that dash cams are useful. People have interpreted the footage of this particular incident in whichever way they deem fit, proof and facts have had little bearing on people's views. When two parties are telling two different insurance companies that they both manoeuvred correctly I can't see how footage of the incident wouldn't be useful. A dashcam in either car in the OP incident would certainly have informed their insurance company whether they followed the road markings correctly or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 I can't believe the people are still arguing about this! The law is, if you cross lanes, you check first. The white car did not and caused the accident. Its irrespective of whether or not the sign 100m+ away said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now