The Lemon Fool

In my experience, when a road narrows you can get a blue, red and white "Priority over oncoming vehicles" in one direction, and a red, white and black "Give way to oncoming vehicles" in the opposite direction.

However I've seen at least one case where there's the "Give way to oncoming vehicles" in both directions. Speaking to a local, he thought it made sense as it meant everybody would be cautious and polite, and it would be safer.

But to me it was just wrong, not a valid use of the signs, and more likely to cause confusion.

What do others think?

Here it is, facing one way. If you travel through the narrow bit and turn round, you'll see the same sign going the other way.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.354594,-2.6322814,3a,75y,201.39h,65.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-wtLDbB3SMFSj5XGgDorSw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Scott.

My experience is that normally one direction has priority and one has a give way but many BMW drivers don't think give way signs apply to them.......I think the give way applies to everyone.

I've never seen a give way in both directions.

Looks like either a simple cock-up, or else a stroppy parish council that's decided to ignore the rules. In fairness, this is a famously tight road that has (in my fairly firm recollection) been in the news because of over-large vehicles getting stuck. Feelings run high in Chew Stoke! (And in Nempnett Thrubwell along the road they're positively boiling.)

Anyway: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:UK_ ... ssion_2009).pdf/14

Paragraph 3.24 appears to have it nailed: "Diagram 615 must be accompanied by the plate to diagram 615.1 "Give way to oncoming vehicles", and diagram 811 must be accompanied by the plate to diagram 811.1 "Priority over oncoming vehicles". Under no circumstances should traffic from both directions be required by the signs or markings to give way."

BJ

Back in the day when there a little more courtesy around , we didn`t need signs as there were unwritten rules to follow.

Thus;-

1. On a narrow road , the first to come to a space would pull over to let the oncoming vehicle pass.

2. A driver going downhill would give way to any vehicle coming up i.e. Man with the load goes first.

Unfortunately, today ,( first one to give way is a chicken ) seems to be the over riding sentiment.

Give them a try. They may become contagious though the dork behind you may see it as an overtaking opportunity.

marronier wrote:Thus;-

1. On a narrow road , the first to come to a space would pull over to let the oncoming vehicle pass.

2. A driver going downhill would give way to any vehicle coming up i.e. Man with the load goes first.

Unfortunately, today ,( first one to give way is a chicken ) seems to be the over riding sentiment.

These days it's the driver with the bigger SUV who'll just bully it through the narrow spaces. I've given up trying to decide whether Rangie drivers are worse than Touaregs (probably), or whether X5s are more likely to give way than Toyota Landcrushers (possibly). Or whether Jeep drivers have ever mastered the art of driving on the left at all? The kings of the narrow road are the rural Hiluxes and the Mitsubishi Warriors with the solid chrome bull bars and the agricultural dents that say they mean business, so stand aside.

BJ

It makes perfect sense to me.

It is a single lane section approximately 80m long. You cannot see clearly to one end from the Give Way at the other, so the ONLY sensible solution is to give way to vehicles already in the narrow section.

They could (perhaps should) have the "you have priority" signs on the reverse of the ones in place, but in reality they serve no purpose.

Paul

DrFfybes wrote:
It makes perfect sense to me. [to have give-way signs at each end]

It is a single lane section approximately 80m long. You cannot see clearly to one end from the Give Way at the other, so the ONLY sensible solution is to give way to vehicles already in the narrow section.

Isn't that always the case anyway, even where different signs exist at each end?

In those more usual cases, where there are different signs at each end of even a fully-visible section, wouldn't anyone approaching either end always give way to vehicles already in them, no matter what the sign says at 'their' end?

Surely someone who arrived 'early' and entered the 'you should give-way' end of a section with different signs at each end when the section was empty, can't then be penalised for setting off through it if there's no other vehicles coming the other way when they do so?

If we accept that this is the case, then any vehicle then approaching the end that has 'rightful priority' whilst the first vehicle is still in the narrow section would still have to 'give-way' at that point anyway, even if they'd normally have the priority if the section were empty?

How does someone 'give-way' when they've not got priority, if they are already in the narrow section? Are they to reverse back to the 'give-way' sign when they see anyone approaching from the 'priority-end' of the narrow section?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

I can't be the only one who has sign dyslexia over this one (I'm sure they don't always have the words underneath?). Is the RED arrow the one with the priority or the LARGER arrow seems to be my main cause of my confusion. So I tend to ignore the sign and use the 'usual' rules, i.e. give way unless the other car has clearly stopped and is giving way.

Since not everyone seems to adhere to the rules anyway, this reinforces my approach.

There is also the problem that one persons definition of arrived 'early' is different from the next person (being generous).

Additionally as you rightly point out, regardless of priority you have to give way to someone already in the narrow section. Which seems to lead to the problem that some people (without priority) see that someone is already traversing, so by definition the vehicle at the other end MUST be giving way so I'll follow them in with no fear of a collision.

DrFfybes wrote:It makes perfect sense to me.

Makes perfect sense to me too. It works exactly the same as a roundabout: vehicles on all roads onto the roundabout have to give way, any vehicle on the roundabout has priority until it exits.


GS

swill453 wrote:However I've seen at least one case where there's the "Give way to oncoming vehicles" in both directions. Speaking to a local, he thought it made sense as it meant everybody would be cautious and polite, and it would be safer.

The only instance I have seen was a few years ago.

The problem was that as soon as people realised the other person had to give way as well, then neither gave way. It lasted a fortnight before it was removed and replaced by a normal give way to one direction after a few near misses and more than few stand-offs.

taylor20 wrote:I can't be the only one who has sign dyslexia over this one (I'm sure they don't always have the words underneath?). Is the RED arrow the one with the priority or the LARGER arrow seems to be my main cause of my confusion.

One of the signs is round with a red border. This means DON'T.
The other is a blue rectangle. This means DO.

marronier wrote:Unfortunately, today ,( first one to give way is a chicken ) seems to be the over riding sentiment.

But why was the chicken crossing the road in the first place?

StepOne