1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186 
Speed limiters demand tolerance from all
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I READ WITH interest Kevin Barker's letter headed Avoid three-in-the-bed situations' (CM 12 October 2006) in which he comments on a photograph of traffic on the M62. I see the photo in an entirely different way to Barker. He makes the observation that the traffic in lanes one and two is light and the vehicles are travelling a safe distance apart; the traffic in lane three is heavier and the vehicles
are too close. However, I believe the reason for this is they are trying to pass the rolling road block caused by a vehicle in lane two trying to pass a vehicle in lane one.
The speed differential between the vehicles is so small it takes a very long time and distance to pass, which frustrates other motorists and pushes them into the very busy third lane. With all LGVs speed limited to 56mph there will only ever be
a tiny speed difference between them. I feel the experiment on the M42 (restricting LGVs to one lane) is a result of this behaviour. and can only lead to more legislation in the future.
If motorists were more tolerant of each other and worked together, we would all see the benefits— and,I suspect, far fewer accidents and road closures. David Wooff Cannock, West Midlands