New video - overtaking

[Observer2]

R_U_LOCAL said:

Firstly, watch how the lorry driver negotiates the roundabout. They're extremely careful to stay towards the nearside, and in reality (although I never would do), I could have passed the truck on the roundabout itself. I got the impression that the driver was acutely aware of the possibility that I may try to take him on the roundabout having seen my faster approach, and he's more than likely had plenty of other car drivers try to pass him there previously.
Having seen how carefully the driver remained nearside, I was confident that they would remain nearside when leaving the roundabout, as the left-hander off the roundabout wasn't as tight as the roundabout itself.
As for the possibility of cyclists, pedestrians etc, you're quite correct - it's a dual carriageway, not a motorway, and they could always be present.
However, as I entered the roundabout, and my steering input went from left to right, I had a good view to my right, in front of the truck, and I was able to check for nearside hazards. This view was unfortunately too far off to the right to be caught on the forward-facing camera, but I can assure you that they were possibilities that I'd considered.

Fair enough Reg. I thought you probably would have a good explanation but it seemed worth mentioning as a potential hazard.

WRT my emphasised text, I acknowledge that general principle. In this sort of case, the big risk of course is that a vehicle on your nearside is intending to take a later exit than you and therefore ends up on an intersecting path. However, if you can be certain of getting past the target on the roundabout and clear your exit before the target vehicle reaches it, does it seems reasonable to suggest that the principle can be relaxed? Being alongside another vehicle on the inside of a bend/curve seems generally preferable to being on the outside, no?

[R_U_LOCAL]

Observer2 said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

Firstly, watch how the lorry driver negotiates the roundabout. They're extremely careful to stay towards the nearside, and in reality (although I never would do), I could have passed the truck on the roundabout itself. I got the impression that the driver was acutely aware of the possibility that I may try to take him on the roundabout having seen my faster approach, and he's more than likely had plenty of other car drivers try to pass him there previously.
Having seen how carefully the driver remained nearside, I was confident that they would remain nearside when leaving the roundabout, as the left-hander off the roundabout wasn't as tight as the roundabout itself.
As for the possibility of cyclists, pedestrians etc, you're quite correct - it's a dual carriageway, not a motorway, and they could always be present.
However, as I entered the roundabout, and my steering input went from left to right, I had a good view to my right, in front of the truck, and I was able to check for nearside hazards. This view was unfortunately too far off to the right to be caught on the forward-facing camera, but I can assure you that they were possibilities that I'd considered.

Fair enough Reg. I thought you probably would have a good explanation but it seemed worth mentioning as a potential hazard.

WRT my emphasised text, I acknowledge that general principle. In this sort of case, the big risk of course is that a vehicle on your nearside is intending to take a later exit than you and therefore ends up on an intersecting path. However, if you can be certain of getting past the target on the roundabout and clear your exit before the target vehicle reaches it, does it seems reasonable to suggest that the principle can be relaxed? Being alongside another vehicle on the inside of a bend/curve seems generally preferable to being on the outside, no?

In the case of a large and/or articulated vehicle, no - definitely not. I've seen countless accidents caused by a car driver going up the inside of an HGV on a roundabout, only to find that the driver of the larger vehicle needs the full width of the road to negotiate the junction. I've never actually seen anyone injured in these bumps, but it's amazing how much damage rotating HGV wheels can make to the nearside of a car. I'm slightly less reluctant to overtake cars and other smaller vehicles on a roundabout, but I still want to be certain that they'll maintain their nearside position and that they're not going to turn right from the left-hand lane.

You can be more confident passing longer vehicles on larger roundabouts, particularly those which are lane-marked, but you should still be wary.

[Heebeegeetee]

Oi, whats wrong with the caravan? As always, its the car thats causing the queue.

I mean, the caravan was going quicker than that Alfa 156, on a twistier road too.

[Zeeky]

R_U_LOCAL said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

stuthemong said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

There would be no case to argue - it's a perfectly legitimate place to overtake. I wasn't driving a Police car when I made the video - I was a member of the public like everyone else.

I'm really not trying to be faceious, just trying to learn, so please don't think I'm trying to annoy here RULocal.

I'm not annoyed - just answering the question.

stuthemong said:

HighwayCode said:

if the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is *necessary* and you can see that it is safe to do so.

Now my interpretation of this, would be that overtaking a car is never really necessary, ergo passing into hatched area to do this could not be justified in this respect. I had read the rule and interpreted it to mean something like that if there was a ambulance or police car with sirens flying along, if you thought it necessary, you were legally allowed to pull into the hatched area to let them pass.

I've never seen a definition of "necessary" as applied to that highway code rule. In the absence of such a definition, we're left to use our own interpretation of "necessary". In this case, I felt it was necessary for me to overtake the lorry, and I could see that it was safe to do so.

I think the necessary applies to whether or not you can carry out a safe and legal manouevre without using the hatching rather than whether or not the safe and legal manouevre (in this case overtaking) is necessary in itself.

This interpetation is easier to agree on. After all is it necessary to be driving at all?

Edited by Zeeky on Friday 12th October 22:37

[Enfield]

Excellent driving there, Sir.

Very smooth and observant; really makes me want to go out for a drive which is a tad annoying seeing as my car is off the road.

[AREA]

Reg, I'm really struggling with the Volvo/caravan overtake.

I've watched the lorry out of the roundabout over and over, and ok, I'll buy into your having a better view of anything on the left hand side than the camera did. Doesn't look like it, but since videos make me look two stone heavier that I think I am, we'll trust you and not the camera ;-)

But, on right hand side of the road, through a left hand bend for 8 seconds before you stood any chance of getting back to safety!!?? Ok, previous views (that the camera didn't really catch) may have allowed you to see through the road ahead. However, at 8mins28secs you go past a layby. Not at all clear from the footage that you could have seen that and any car emerging from it. Were you "playing the odds" rather than absolute certainty on that pass? Put my mind at rest, and my faith in you, and tell me that you could see all the way through the road and the layby, please!

Children, don't try this at home.

[R_U_LOCAL]

AREA said:

Reg, I'm really struggling with the Volvo/caravan overtake.

I've watched the lorry out of the roundabout over and over, and ok, I'll buy into your having a better view of anything on the left hand side than the camera did. Doesn't look like it, but since videos make me look two stone heavier that I think I am, we'll trust you and not the camera ;-)

But, on right hand side of the road, through a left hand bend for 8 seconds before you stood any chance of getting back to safety!!?? Ok, previous views (that the camera didn't really catch) may have allowed you to see through the road ahead. However, at 8mins28secs you go past a layby. Not at all clear from the footage that you could have seen that and any car emerging from it. Were you "playing the odds" rather than absolute certainty on that pass? Put my mind at rest, and my faith in you, and tell me that you could see all the way through the road and the layby, please!

Children, don't try this at home.

I haven't done any videoing prior to posting on this site, and I don't think I appreciated quite how much of a blinkered view it gives. Sure - you can get a good idea of what was happening, but the perspective is very false, and the compression required to reduce the file size for posting means that an awful lot of detail is lost.

However, I've done my best with this to put your mind at rest - I wouldn't want you thinking that I played the odds at all - risk is something I try to completely eliminate from driving.

Here's the first view I got of the extended view past the left-hander. I've highlighted the layby/field entrance with a red circle. The time stamp on this picture is 07.56, and from here, although it isn't obvious from the video, I could see that there was nothing in the layby...



It's not obvious from that picture, I know, but here's a screen dump from my higher (pre-compression) quality video, on which I've also played with the lighting and contrast...



You should be able to make out the layby on that picture, which is just after the first picture.

As we move forward, I've highlighted the position of the layby, beyond which, you can still see my furthest view of the road. This is at 8.03, so 7 seconds after the first picture. Remember that my overtaking plan is based on an imaginary vehicle travelling at high speed towards me...



And a third picture, still with the layby in view, and still with a good extended view of the road ahead - the time is now 8.07, so that's now 11 seconds after the first picture...



As we move on to the next picture, this is where the camera problems become apparant. this picture is taken at 8.12 - 18 seconds after the first picture, and I've still got a good extended view up the road. I'm just starting to lose my view of the layby, but I already know there's nothing there - it's about here that I have to make a final decision as to whether I would come into conflict with a high-speed on-coming vehicle. From the camera's view, we've no idea, but from my view, I was more than happy that the pass was on...



It's only at the next picture where I've momentarily lost my view, but I'm more than confident with my prior observations, that I can safely complete the overtake. This is at 8.16, 20 seconds from my first view...



To be honest, I was expecting more questions about this overtake, so I'm more than happy to clear this one up.

[Vaux]

R_U_LOCAL said:

To be honest, I was expecting more questions about this overtake, so I'm more than happy to clear this one up.

I was happy with the views, my concern was the Volvo popping out as I wrote earlier.

I suppose the question could be "Would Von (on a working day) have taken the overtake?"

Edited by Vaux on Wednesday 17th October 21:01

[AREA]

Reg - thanks, mind put at rest and faith fully restored! The more in depth explanation really does demonstrate that driving (making progress safely)rather than travelling/commuting (going from A to B without thinking about it) is a true craft and is based on a broad range of observational and anticipatory skills.

Masterpiece! Sorry to have doubted.

Thanks.

[WhoseGeneration]

Erm, he overtakes, safely, he demonstrates and explains the process.
It is what he teaches in his profession.
Observe and learn.
Or, accept what seems to be the current ideology.
Overtaking bad.
Your choice.

[R_U_LOCAL]

Vaux said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

To be honest, I was expecting more questions about this overtake, so I'm more than happy to clear this one up.

I was happy with the views, my concern was the Volvo popping out as I wrote earlier.

I suppose the question could be "Would Von (on a working day) have taken the overtake?"

As I mentioned previously, I'd been following the two vehicles for quite some time before the clip starts, and I'd already seen the Volvo miss several blatently obvious opportunities to overtake, so I was happy that the Volvo driver wouldn't move out when I started to overtake.

As for whether VH would have gone for it, well, he's got similar qualifications and experience to me, so I suspect the answer would be yes.

[Yung Man]

R_U_LOCAL said:

Ok, my first efforts with a video camera were pretty wobbly to say the least.



Here's the video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvrhb1mDkYs

Enjoy!

I bet you got airborn passing that Alfa.
I thought that road looked familiar at about 2 minutes, for god sake don't tell everybody where it is (if they don't already know)I'm going out there tomorrow morning.

[R_U_LOCAL]

Yung Man said:

I bet you got airborn passing that Alfa.

How much do you want to bet?

[Yung Man]

R_U_LOCAL said:

Yung Man said:

I bet you got airborn passing that Alfa.

How much do you want to bet?

I took that hill at no more than 60mph, If I'd known about that bomb hole I would have eased off the gas, as it was the revs shot up so the back wheels must have been clear of the tarmac.
Respect for passing at that point, I wouldn't have done it.

[R_U_LOCAL]

Yung Man said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

Yung Man said:

I bet you got airborn passing that Alfa.

How much do you want to bet?

I took that hill at no more than 60mph, If I'd known about that bomb hole I would have eased off the gas, as it was the revs shot up so the back wheels must have been clear of the tarmac.
Respect for passing at that point, I wouldn't have done it.

I'd have to suggest that 60mph is a bit too quick for that crest. The Alfa was quite slow-moving and my overtake was carried out at much less than 60mph.

[Yung Man]

I've heard it scares the life out of bikers when they take it for the first time, they tend to take the right hander, accelerate up the hill, then if they are lucky they see the dip when it's too late to lose speed.
I prefer to go out early to miss the crowds that way overtaking is less of a problem.

[The Black Flash]

My thanks to Reg for this - overtaking has long been my biggest weakness and this has helped immensely. I've been practicing some of the points over the last couple of weeks and my technique has improved enormously.

And also thanks to PH at large - for reminding me that overtaking and making progress is not a BAD thing. I feel like I've been saved in the nick of time.

[KB_S1]

WhoseGeneration said:

Erm, he overtakes, safely, he demonstrates and explains the process.
It is what he teaches in his profession.
Observe and learn.
Or, accept what seems to be the current ideology.
Overtaking bad.
Your choice.

Just noticed this and have to disagree.

No one should be expected to just sit back and accept something they are told if they have doubts, especially when it comes to something as potentially dangerous as overtaking.

As we have seen every time someone asks a question Reg deals with it very well and imparts more detail on the scenario.
If no one questions the demonstrations and advice we may end up with many false understandings.

I have no doubt that every overtake was safe, progressive and well executed. I may however need to question aspects of it to understand more fully the process, information and assessment that led to the overtake.

[R_U_LOCAL]

KB_S1 said:

WhoseGeneration said:

Erm, he overtakes, safely, he demonstrates and explains the process.
It is what he teaches in his profession.
Observe and learn.
Or, accept what seems to be the current ideology.
Overtaking bad.
Your choice.

Just noticed this and have to disagree.

No one should be expected to just sit back and accept something they are told if they have doubts, especially when it comes to something as potentially dangerous as overtaking.

As we have seen every time someone asks a question Reg deals with it very well and imparts more detail on the scenario.
If no one questions the demonstrations and advice we may end up with many false understandings.

I have no doubt that every overtake was safe, progressive and well executed. I may however need to question aspects of it to understand more fully the process, information and assessment that led to the overtake.

I also disagree. I can't cover every conceivable point when writing these posts, and I'm more than happy to fill in gaps or clarify things.

The last thing I want people to have after reading them is any doubts, so please keep the questions coming.

[Yung Man]

R_U_LOCAL said:

KB_S1 said:

WhoseGeneration said:

Erm, he overtakes, safely, he demonstrates and explains the process.

The last thing I want people to have after reading them is any doubts, so please keep the questions coming.

Good video Reg but overtaking people on country lanes is easier in an M3 than in a Renualt Clio 1.2 (for example), when I was young and foolish (as apposed to being old and foolish) and driving under powered cars/ vans I found flying up behind people trying to work out whether that truck coming the otherway would be out the way when I got there (ready to pop out)was er, interesting.
The IAM way seems to be hold station waiting for the gap then accelerate past which is like I said easier in an M3.
Can drivers in under powered cars hang back then boot it 4 seconds before it's clear to give themselve that edge, obviously if at the 4 second point you have to abort you just have to drop back and try again, I know it looks very ameturish and I don't do it (honest), but what would your advice be?.............apart from get a bigger car.