Giving way to right-turning vehicles?

[Ixion]

If you want a mantra , just remember

"Left turn loser; car to the right, sit tight"

[swbarnett]

If you want a mantra , just remember

"Left turn loser; car to the right, sit tight"

Except for the exceptions.

Yes. And it is breathtakingly simple. I cannot believe that any creature with enough sentience to keep breathing cannot understand it

I agree that our road laws are at a level that any educated ten year old should be able to understand. I think this says more about our education system than anything else.

, so I think those who complain are simply foreigners who want to complain about anything that is different to "back home" just for the sake of it.

I was born in Auckland and apart from two years in Switzerland have lived in Auckland for the last 43. One of the biggest things that struck while I lived there was the impressive driving standard (and you hardly ever saw a cop on traffic duty). There are several reasons for this. Far and away the biggest is that fact that drivers respect each other and each other's right to be there. This is aided by the the fact that the traffic density is very low (one car for every 1350 people in Zurich). Next in line are the road rules - they just make sense. The first thing I did after my first cycle around my local town was find the nearest office of their equivalent of the LTNZ and pick up an English language version of their road code. What struck me first was how thin it was. Because the rules are close to common sense you don't need pages of exceptions and explanations of a myriad of different types of intersections. There was even a paragraph stating that if you got into a situation where the give way rules didn't seem to be working (thinking specifically about the tight, twisting mountain roads) then the vehicles involved where supposed to make up their own minds as to what would work (and when in doubt any bus driver present had authority over the situation - the buses and their drivers were phenomenal, but that's another story).

If our rules in NZ are "breathtakingly simple" then we need a new word to describe the Swiss road rules.

[Skyryder]

Yes. And it is breathtakingly simple. I cannot believe that any creature with enough sentience to keep breathing cannot understand it, so I think those who complain are simply foreigners who want to complain about anything that is different to "back home" just for the sake of it.

C is turning left, so he is bottom of the heap and must give to everybody.

A and B are both turning right so are on equal terms. But when A looks to his right he sees B , so he must give way.

Sorted. Now, really, how hard was that. And are you having trouble figuring out the breathing thing?

At the risk of being pedantic C has no need to give way to B as they are not on any collision course. C must certainly give way to A if B is not present.

However as A has to give way to B C can safely turn left as B is making a right hand turn. If I could post up a diagram I would but I can't so it's back to the heavy breathing thing.


Skyryder

[Hinny]

It's fuckin' harder to pull out right in front of someone anyway from an uncontrolled intersection then to let them turn! This rule should be abolished.

Think about it. You are advocating crossing each others path as being better than not! That's not very logical is it?

[Hinny]

All these people having trouble with the right hand rule makes you realise how dangerous it is driving on our roads. It is as basic as driving on the left.
Can probably blame the confusion on the traffic engineers who insist on overiding the right hand rule, at almost every intersection, with give way signs. There are probably more exceptions to the rule than not as a result of their meddling. This is part of their master plan to facilitate traffic flows by creating major roads and reducing the status of the rest to the equivalence of private driveways.They then wonder why we have traffic jams. It's like taking a sieve and blocking up most of the holes and making some bigger. Block one hole and you create mayhem. Take the cars off thirty roads and put them on one - Yeah that's really bright. Let the traffic flow on the roads that are there, taking the shortest route to their destination, seems far more sensible to me.
Goes along with their practice of spending roading dollars on destroying the existing infrastructure by putting bumps in perfectly smooth roads and great lumps of concrete all over the place. Instead of maintaining or, perish the thought, improving the roads we already have, they are proceeding full speed ahead with their evil plans of destruction. Are they all bmx riders? Want to give us a thrill on the way to work. Swerve around this, bounce off that, have a little bit of jiggy jig jiggle here as we bump our way over the corrugations of the breaking up pavement. FFS give us decent roads that we can drive down and we wouldn't need to drive 4x4's in Remuera and Herne Bay. Have you seen the roads in Herne Bay/Ponsonby? All the rates these people pay and look at the roads they get. Urgent need to get rid of the people responsible for that fiasco.
Probably need to drive on the other side of the road as well.

[Ixion]

At the risk of being pedantic C has no need to give way to B as they are not on any collision course. C must certainly give way to A if B is not present.

However as A has to give way to B C can safely turn left as B is making a right hand turn. If I could post up a diagram I would but I can't so it's back to the heavy breathing thing.


Skyryder

Strictly , C must give way to A. But A must give way to B. Therefore the order of precedence is B A C . (Shit, I hope I got that right. This alphabet soup is making my head asplode)

In practice as you note, people will make such slight modifications to the strict rules as prudence and common sense permit.

It is important to note that the requirement is to give way. Once one has yielded the right of way, if he who has the superior right is unable to avail himself of it , nothing stops one proceeding. It is "give way", not "wait until the other person is gone". For instance, if one is required to give way to another motorist, who then stalls his vehicle, nothing prevents one proceeding.

In reality, it is more easily done than explained. Like sex.

[Jiminy]

I agree that our road laws are at a level that any educated ten year old should be able to understand. I think this says more about our education system than anything else.

Aouch! Hey, I'm not the one who said that . Didn't say I disagree, either . Now what if the license test was a bit more decent? Felt much too easy if you ask me...

I was born in Auckland and apart from two years in Switzerland have lived in Auckland for the last 43. (...)

I might argue that CH has a higher density of population, making the roads feel at least as busy as here (note that I don't drive in Auckland). But, yeah, drivers in most of CH are legends, less sure about the peripheral regions.

On the same topic, I find it simplistic to follow the road marking and traffic signs, and apply the give way to the right rule when there is no marking. Far simpler than viewing the road marking as an exception to the rule. My two cents...

[swbarnett]

I might argue that CH has a higher density of population, making the roads feel at least as busy as here (note that I don't drive in Auckland).

Yes, over the country as a whole the population is denser than here (~9million people in an area the size of the central north island). However, There are more towns than in NZ so the population is spread more evenly over the whole country. As a result it didn't feel any more crowded than NZ (and it felt less crowded than Auckland - even in Zurich).

As for the roads, there's a a darn sight less traffic on them than in NZ (at least Auckland anyway). Because the public transport system is so good (I've not seen better) people who don't want to drive don't have to (unlike Auckland where it's almost mandatory). When I had to return a rental car on a Monday morning I travelled from Brugg to Basel (~65km) on state of the art motorways the entire way and averaged about 130kph (speed limit 120kph) the traffic was so light. In Basel the traffic banked up a little but not nearly as much as it does in Auckland.

But, yeah, drivers in most of CH are legends, less sure about the peripheral regions.

Everywhere but Geneva that I drove I found the same. My theory is that the presence of the UN brings in a large number of non-Swiss drivers to muddy the waters.

[90s]

This alphabet soup is making my head asplode

I am have passed the licence to drive & ride in 4 countries, and have been pedantically proud to be able to remember and understand the road codes in each of these, and other those of other countries too.

Before this thread I understood the rules totally.

After this thread all I understand is that I am to view people's right turning (or left turning ... where was 'c' again?) doors as a target and attempt to ram them. And I'll overtake from now on on the motorway on any lane I please, including the hard shoulder, because if enough people believe its legal it must be.

[90s]

wasnt in germany then

maybe in the states i dont recall
but you drive in the middle and passing is on the left .
and theres patrol cars and vans that ticket you for going to slow
seen it on tv
think if your traveling slower than 160 km you get a ticket

Not the states! 160kph in the states?
I've driven all over the world, and I don't recognise the system you are talking about here at all.

Pls describe what you mean - "drive in the middle and passing is on the left".
Is this for a system driving on the same side as NZ? If so there are few countries that do. If not then passing on the left is that same as here.
The situation on many 'motorways' where people would drive "in the middle" would be when the inside rd is given over to certain things, such as entering/exiting the motorway.

Intriqued, pls. let us know more.

[Mikkel]

I fucked the give way rule, as described in post #1, up during my 6R practical - but the examiner was a good fella and let me get away with it for a number of reasons.

However, the give way to right turning traffic rule in NZ is stupid. It is that simple. Not because it is hard to remember or difficult to implement.
No, simply because it doesn't make sense and it provokes dangerous situations all the time. It forces a driver who is turning left to split his attention to both the left-and the righthand side of the road. In dense traffic, i.e. city traffic, this provides a very good oppotunity for mowing down cyclists, etc.
On the other hand - it provides a driver turning right with more opportunities to complete his turn... However, once you have commited to that turn - if anything at all goes wrong you could be in big big trouble. It is an idiotic rule and there's a reason why it's unique to NZ. It does go some way to make kiwis a more endagered species though and as such it makes it easier to identify with the national icon

[homer]

Not the states! 160kph in the states?
I've driven all over the world, and I don't recognise the system you are talking about here at all.


Pls describe what you mean - "drive in the middle and passing is on the left".
Is this for a system driving on the same side as NZ? If so there are few countries that do. If not then passing on the left is that same as here.
The situation on many 'motorways' where people would drive "in the middle" would be when the inside rd is given over to certain things, such as entering/exiting the motorway.

Intriqued, pls. let us know more.

Yes driving on the same side of the road as here .
think the whole piece on tv was because there was one fella who tests the porsche top speed before they ship them to the new owners, and its where they test the top speed and then send a certificate with the car , photo showing the speed on the speedo.
top speed was 312 km
I saw it on tv quite a long time back , dont recall in the slightest where
"poland" ? i have no idea
its like the auto bahn , motorway here heading north from chch
similar, any ways al lthe traffic stays in the middle lanes going north and south, the passing lane is the left lane, so if your not in a hurry you stay in the middle and all the passing vehicles have to make the judgement of to pass or not and they decide when and how they merge back in to the constant flow .
this was also a not speed restriction area that if you travel under im sure was posted at 160 km you got a ticket

[90s]

Weird. Still, sounds like fun. I forget what guilt free speed feels like over here.

[Skyryder]

I fucked the give way rule, as described in post #1, up during my 6R practical - but the examiner was a good fella and let me get away with it for a number of reasons.

However, the give way to right turning traffic rule in NZ is stupid. It is that simple. Not because it is hard to remember or difficult to implement.
No, simply because it doesn't make sense and it provokes dangerous situations all the time. It forces a driver who is turning left to split his attention to both the left-and the righthand side of the road. In dense traffic, i.e. city traffic, this provides a very good oppotunity for mowing down cyclists, etc.
On the other hand - it provides a driver turning right with more opportunities to complete his turn... However, once you have commited to that turn - if anything at all goes wrong you could be in big big trouble. It is an idiotic rule and there's a reason why it's unique to NZ. It does go some way to make kiwis a more endagered species though and as such it makes it easier to identify with the national icon

Spot on Mikkel. There was a time when the left hand turn had the right of way but if memory is correct this was changed sometime in the sixties. The idea being that vehicles would not be obstructing the intersection giving way to the left turning vehicle. It has never worked from day one to the present.

There was talk of this changing back to the 'old' way but the boffins in NZ Land Transport considered that this would be to confusing. One has only to look at the current signalling laws on roundabouts to understand their wisdom on what they claim to be experts on.

Skyryder

[Badjelly]

Spot on Mikkel. There was a time when the left hand turn had the right of way but if memory is correct this was changed sometime in the sixties.

If my memory is correct, then yours isn't. The new road rules were introduced in 1978, I believe. They were called the "new rules" until well into the 1990s, but this usage has dropped away recently.

I was one of the people who initially thought the new rules were a good thing, because they were simpler and less ambiguous. Some time in the last 30 years, I changed my mind. I am very disappointed that the proposal to change them a few years ago was dropped.