Originally Posted by I'm Popeye! (Post 1946477)

Here is the problem, which gives the right to that white SUV driver to cross the broken line.
The lane-line should be a solid white line not a broken line, IMHO.

Originally Posted by I'm Popeye! (Post 1946477)

Here is the problem, which gives the right to that white SUV driver to cross the broken line.
The lane-line should be a solid white line not a broken line, IMHO.

Originally Posted by Polar Bear (Post 1946506)

Nope. The dashed line is proper. The driver in the right lane is allowed to go straight through the roundabout.

Originally Posted by I'm Popeye! (Post 1946530)

That's exactly what I said, "give the White car the right to cross the line". Again, the broken line should be a solid line to keep cars from turning into oncoming traffic.
[I] Please read carefully what others write.[/I]

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 1946491)

The broken line enables drivers entering from the right to continue straight. The driver in the white car, who entered previously and not from the right, must go straight and exit the circle.

Originally Posted by Polar Bear (Post 1946506)

Nope. The dashed line is proper. The driver in the right lane is allowed to go straight through the roundabout.

Originally Posted by MrFlorida (Post 1945500)

I always expect to be cut off in the roundabouts, and I am seldom disappointed.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 1946231)

OK, that's an opinion, but it would have been more polite to explain WHY it was such a bad idea. The round-a-bouts have ALWAYS been problems and will ALWAYS be problems. They only seem to work well when traffic density is low. Therefore, all suggestions for change should be considered. I always liked one-way streets like the way Washington D.C. was set up. For example, it MIGHT (?) work to have all 4 lanes of Morse go (say ) SOUTH and all 4 lanes of Buena Vista go (say) NORTH. Then the smaller east / west roads could also be made one way. I believe that one-way roads tend to have fewer accidents.

Originally Posted by I'm Popeye! (Post 1946477)

Here is the problem, which gives the right to that white SUV driver to cross the broken line.
The lane-line should be a solid white line not a broken line, IMHO.

Originally Posted by davem4616 (Post 1945669)

hey deal with it, in Boston we never used a turn signal...why would we ever wanna give the enemy any information on what we're planning to do???

It's tough world out there...drive defensively and expect the unexpected

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus (Post 1946705)

Let's not be so quick to trash the "idiot driver." The driver crossed a broken white line.

This is from stateofFlorida.com:

"Broken white lines separate lines of traffic going in the same direction. They may be crossed with care."

If the line were solid where the white SUV crossed lanes, you would be correct.

Originally Posted by BlackhawksFan (Post 1946503)

It's Bostonian's.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 1946718)

Pretty sure that "traffic going in the same direction" doesn't include "making a left turn from the right lane"...

Originally Posted by MizJodi (Post 1946238)

Is there anywhere in the US where it is legal to make a left hand turn from the right hand lane?

Originally Posted by Two Bills (Post 1946577)

Roundabouts are not a problem, they are a positive in getting cars from A to B quicker.
The problem is lazy drivers who cannot be bothered to learn the rule of the road, and make up their own rules.
The rest of the world has no problems with them.
Just Villagers!!

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1945733)

Ah okay I spaced out on that first exit, it came up basically right after you entered.

This is the hard part though: what would you have done if the white car had come in from that spot, and was planning on going 2 exits away (one further than you)? He'd still be where he was, and you'd still be where you were, and he'd have the right to continue in that lane, and you'd still have the right to exit from your lane.

That's WHY these traffic circles are so harrowing. Because it really doesn't matter what lane you are "supposed" to be in. If I came in from the exit before yours, and I came in on the inner lane, and I'm taking my second exit...and you show up in the outer lane and you're taking YOUR second exit - we're both doing what we are allowed to do. Except - there's that risk that I'm going to try and take that exit I'm allowed to take, while you're still heading toward the exit you're allowed take - and there might just be a potential for a crash unless everyone is going at exactly the right speed, at exactly the right distance from each other, in exactly the right order.

Originally Posted by rjsantos592 (Post 1945770)

Sounds to me like this was staged. How could you possibly know that this "white" car was going to cut in front of you at that distance?

Originally Posted by Malsua (Post 1945807)

And this is why if they simply made them 1 lane, this issue goes away.

As OBB said up above, if the white SUV had entered at the 2nd entrance instead of the cammer entrance, they could theoretically be in exactly the same place, at exactly the same time, the only difference is that they entered in a different spot.
In that particular case, they'd be perfectly fine with doing exactly what they did as far as the direction, they still probably failed to yield.

Someone is supposed to yield, and the only way to make the yield crash proof is to...NEVER ENTER a RB with traffic. I.E. then what's the point of having two lanes?

Originally Posted by Petersweeney (Post 1945845)

I wonder if someone followed you around all day and filmed
You doing something stupid then posted it on the internet..... you would call that guy a big jerk ...

Originally Posted by mmorrison123 (Post 1945878)

Nice graphic from the pamphlet. One thing that you can see is that none of the routes through the circle cross any solid or dashed lane markers (except for the ones to enter the circle. Is so simple. Don’t cross solid lines. If you must cross a dashed line you must give right it way to any vehicles already in the lane on the other side of the dashed line. It’s no different in a circle than anywhere else on the road.

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 1946253)

10000+ views so far. Roundabouts never seem to loose the luster no matter how many "Sumter County Sherriff" pamphlets are published. No problem - don't argue here - argue your standpoint to the Sherriff Deputy that hands you the traffic violation. I'm too lazy tonight to research but my guess is dog poop is still the number one thread.

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus (Post 1946725)

The purple elephant in the living room...the real rule breaker that nobody likes to talk about because of the large number of golf carts here... is how many TV golf cart drivers don't know (or ignore) the rule that they must yield to cars when they merge with ongoing traffic. But that's another story. When I'm driving, I yield to golf carts just to keep the peace, though, and avoid an accident.

Originally Posted by airstreamingypsy (Post 1945951)

To me, the car that's a whisker ahead, may turn in front of me. It may not supposed to, but I expect they might....... it's worked for me so far.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser (Post 1946231)

OK, that's an opinion, but it would have been more polite to explain WHY it was such a bad idea. The round-a-bouts have ALWAYS been problems and will ALWAYS be problems. They only seem to work well when traffic density is low. Therefore, all suggestions for change should be considered. I always liked one-way streets like the way Washington D.C. was set up. For example, it MIGHT (?) work to have all 4 lanes of Morse go (say ) SOUTH and all 4 lanes of Buena Vista go (say) NORTH. Then the smaller east / west roads could also be made one way. I believe that one-way roads tend to have fewer accidents.

Originally Posted by Jeanne wilson (Post 1946250)

Roundabouts should only have one lane, to turn from the left lane and make a right turn is asking for an accident. In Ohio, they are one lane.

Originally Posted by Topspinmo (Post 1946773)

See you still have that model T driving attitude.

This is not Kansas (ohio) Toto. :)

Originally Posted by Polar Bear (Post 1946798)

1) When approaching the roundabout, yield to BOTH lanes before you enter;

2) When in the roundabout, never drive next to another vehicle.

All problems solved. :)

Originally Posted by Malsua (Post 1946799)

It's almost as if having just a single lane would solve these issues. :a040:

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus (Post 1946720)

Actually it's Bostonians.

Originally Posted by Number 10 GI (Post 1946748)

You forget that the people living in TV all came from somewhere else in the world.

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter (Post 1945914)

Only 109 more posts for a new record on a roundabout thread.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...ht=roundabouts 178 posts

Originally Posted by Polar Bear (Post 1946805)

And present a whole new set of problems you do not want to deal with. :a040:

Originally Posted by Malsua (Post 1946838)

Funny, but I have lived in NJ for the past 25 years and driven in Europe quite a lot over the last 15. I can think of only one circle anywhere near me that has two lanes. It also has a stop light. The circle is intersection is 287/202/206 in Somerville. It's also only kinda 2 lanes. At one spot it drops to one lane, so if you're in the wrong one, you have to merge out.

I also have gone through probably 100 circles around SW Germany where we have a facility so I get there frequently. All of them are single lane. There are a couple near our England facility in Slough that typically have 4-6 cars in the roundabout continuously all day. It is quite busy. I don't see all these massive queues you folks keep talking about. Single lane.