Motorway driving - part 2 (including high speed)
Discussion
Good article. Thanks for sharing and welcome back RUL.
Agree re the over shoulder check. Certainly important in traffic dense situations. In instances where traffic is light and good observation has taken place prior to the overtake I don't always feel this necessary.
If I'm honest high speed driving on the autobahn left me quite fatigued. It takes a decent amount of concentration and observation. As rightly said, the speed difference with you at 140 and others at 70 is very significant. It doesn't take much for another driver to not look/misjudge your speed and 'ruin your day' so to speak. I found a cruising speed of about 110 to be a good balance.
Agree re the over shoulder check. Certainly important in traffic dense situations. In instances where traffic is light and good observation has taken place prior to the overtake I don't always feel this necessary.
If I'm honest high speed driving on the autobahn left me quite fatigued. It takes a decent amount of concentration and observation. As rightly said, the speed difference with you at 140 and others at 70 is very significant. It doesn't take much for another driver to not look/misjudge your speed and 'ruin your day' so to speak. I found a cruising speed of about 110 to be a good balance.
Seriously good article which covers 100 times more than most drivers will ever know.
One or two observations, and they are not criticisms at all. Firstly let me say I'm an ex Strathclyde Cop who took nine weeks of General Purpose driver training, why so much? because I failed two, three week courses. In my defence when I went back the third time the instructor who failed me took me for my assessment drive and at the end asked me who failed me the last time......."You did" (You ba**ard). "Oh!" says he, "you would have passed easily with that assessment drive and I should send you back to division but I expect you wouldn't mind another three weeks of 9 - 5 so to make up for me failing you, I'll keep you on the course if you want". He wasn't such a ba**ard after all! The only thing we weren't taught on the courses, officially, was high speed driving so I won't even encroach on that subject.
In general I do disagree with making a shoulder check on changing lanes. Our instructors rational being that if you have been checking your mirrors properly you will understand, to the make model and colour of the cars behind you, what is going on. Your rear planning should be as good as your forward planning and we were criticised for it on the grounds that no matter how competent we were, there was always the possibility of 'wander' and you were moving your eyes too far from the road ahead as well. When I went on a bikesafe course in Kent I found the problem of 'wander' to be a bit of a problem and noticed the Cop we were with not giving shoulder checks other than to move away. He said precisely the same thing which surprised me.
However, having said all that, on both the driving courses and the bikesafe course it was always qualified with safety. If you even think you have lost sight of a car, can't identify one or find an unexpected one in your mirrors, use it, you may have been ambushed with a late or missed mirror check.
We were taught to use indicators only when necessary, under any circumstances, town, rural or motorway. In this case, even if there is a vehicle resembling a dot in your mirrors, in, say, lane 3 and you want to move into lane 3, use your indicators, he/she might be travelling at warp speed and the signal will give them 3 or 4 seconds more warning. On which subject, the auto indicate function on most cars in my experience in insufficient, you should give 3 or 4 seconds warning, not 2 flashes.
If you are 'caught' passing a line of traffic by a faster car, indicate left before you have passed the leading vehicle, not after you have passed it, it helps ease frustration and gets the driver behind you prepared for you moving in. In most other circumstances, indicating for no apparent good reason just looks unprofessional and dorky.
Where there is 'clumping' in lane 1, and there is nothing approaching in lane 3, I use lane 3. It gives more time if things change quickly on the approach to the clump, which it invariably does.
'Contact' position. Baaaaaaaad idea! Although I have used it when desperately frustrated but come to my senses when I realise I no longer have the benefit of a multicoloured police car with lights and markings everywhere. You are likely to be brake tested without them.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with a judicious flash of the lights, indeed the highway code condones it. One steady 2 or 3 second blast is usually enough but from a distance, not when your in the contact position. That's really designed to panic/piss people off. Another one or two might be necessary by which time you're probably slowing and as pointed out, if they don't move over by that time they probably only use their mirrors to admire themselves. Then you just have to stick it out, although on a couple of occasions I have moved into lane 1, well away from the d
head and gently cruised by, in my little mind justifying it on the principle of two lanes of slow moving traffic...OK, it won't wash in court but there are some decent traffic cops out there who will understand, besides, they will probably be tugging the dhead anyway.
Thanks for a brilliant article, I maintain that no one should be allowed on a motorway or to drive cars over a designated power to weight ratio without having supplemented their ordinary driving licence with a proper 'secondary' course. I hate the expression 'advanced' too elitist.
Whilst we're at it, if anyone imagines conventional driving instructors have to pass an advanced test, think again. They pass the same test learners do, just with less than 6 minors. How's that for logic, send your kid to school to be taught GCSE English by a teacher who only has a GCSE in the subject.
One or two observations, and they are not criticisms at all. Firstly let me say I'm an ex Strathclyde Cop who took nine weeks of General Purpose driver training, why so much? because I failed two, three week courses. In my defence when I went back the third time the instructor who failed me took me for my assessment drive and at the end asked me who failed me the last time......."You did" (You ba**ard). "Oh!" says he, "you would have passed easily with that assessment drive and I should send you back to division but I expect you wouldn't mind another three weeks of 9 - 5 so to make up for me failing you, I'll keep you on the course if you want". He wasn't such a ba**ard after all! The only thing we weren't taught on the courses, officially, was high speed driving so I won't even encroach on that subject.
In general I do disagree with making a shoulder check on changing lanes. Our instructors rational being that if you have been checking your mirrors properly you will understand, to the make model and colour of the cars behind you, what is going on. Your rear planning should be as good as your forward planning and we were criticised for it on the grounds that no matter how competent we were, there was always the possibility of 'wander' and you were moving your eyes too far from the road ahead as well. When I went on a bikesafe course in Kent I found the problem of 'wander' to be a bit of a problem and noticed the Cop we were with not giving shoulder checks other than to move away. He said precisely the same thing which surprised me.
However, having said all that, on both the driving courses and the bikesafe course it was always qualified with safety. If you even think you have lost sight of a car, can't identify one or find an unexpected one in your mirrors, use it, you may have been ambushed with a late or missed mirror check.
We were taught to use indicators only when necessary, under any circumstances, town, rural or motorway. In this case, even if there is a vehicle resembling a dot in your mirrors, in, say, lane 3 and you want to move into lane 3, use your indicators, he/she might be travelling at warp speed and the signal will give them 3 or 4 seconds more warning. On which subject, the auto indicate function on most cars in my experience in insufficient, you should give 3 or 4 seconds warning, not 2 flashes.
If you are 'caught' passing a line of traffic by a faster car, indicate left before you have passed the leading vehicle, not after you have passed it, it helps ease frustration and gets the driver behind you prepared for you moving in. In most other circumstances, indicating for no apparent good reason just looks unprofessional and dorky.
Where there is 'clumping' in lane 1, and there is nothing approaching in lane 3, I use lane 3. It gives more time if things change quickly on the approach to the clump, which it invariably does.
'Contact' position. Baaaaaaaad idea! Although I have used it when desperately frustrated but come to my senses when I realise I no longer have the benefit of a multicoloured police car with lights and markings everywhere. You are likely to be brake tested without them.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with a judicious flash of the lights, indeed the highway code condones it. One steady 2 or 3 second blast is usually enough but from a distance, not when your in the contact position. That's really designed to panic/piss people off. Another one or two might be necessary by which time you're probably slowing and as pointed out, if they don't move over by that time they probably only use their mirrors to admire themselves. Then you just have to stick it out, although on a couple of occasions I have moved into lane 1, well away from the d
head and gently cruised by, in my little mind justifying it on the principle of two lanes of slow moving traffic...OK, it won't wash in court but there are some decent traffic cops out there who will understand, besides, they will probably be tugging the dhead anyway.Thanks for a brilliant article, I maintain that no one should be allowed on a motorway or to drive cars over a designated power to weight ratio without having supplemented their ordinary driving licence with a proper 'secondary' course. I hate the expression 'advanced' too elitist.
Whilst we're at it, if anyone imagines conventional driving instructors have to pass an advanced test, think again. They pass the same test learners do, just with less than 6 minors. How's that for logic, send your kid to school to be taught GCSE English by a teacher who only has a GCSE in the subject.
silverfoxcc said:
Yes, another plus for this. I have been driving since 1964, got the IAM via Rolls Royce in 1999,and still find things that i can take on board, always trying to improve my driving that little bit better.
As regard May overtaking, my instructor waaaaaay back in 1964 did give me two bits of advice that i have never forgoten.
1) an indication by anybody IS NOT sufficient proof or authority to carry out the move,
eg a left indicator, watch his front wheels to confirm, a right indicator,just hold back until he confirms it or not. Also he did say for every 10mph you are travelling, let the indicator that amout of times bfore doing anything.
2) the other thing was the 'cutting back' into a lane over doing the overtake. He said to make sure that you give the chap behind enough 'breathing space' for him not to get humpy at it,he said make sure you see both his headlights in your rear window before moving over, and an indication left is not always required unless you need to move over a bit sooner, as the HC says keep left etc etc.
I can appreciate that with the larger rear windows of todays cars this is not always possible, (my first car was a 1946 Ford Anglia with a letter box sized window)
Also as regards the 'life saver' this was only brought home to me when i took the CBT and ventured out on two wheels. I am of the opinion that a full bike licence should be a pre requisite before you get on four wheels as you are certainly made mor aware of your surroundings,and mortality, when on two, so YES i do use it, nd it has come in handy, esp with those retards who sit just in it for a while not bothering to drop ack or overtake. ONLY in that situation do i make their mind up by slighty moving to my right whilst incresing speed (if possible) before indictating and then proceeding as above.
The Lads at Crewe also instilled the mantra
'If your intentions will cause another motorist to alter their speed,direction or course, abort the thought'
This thread and the earlier one should be made a 'sticky' if it could. The sad thing is guys like us ar in the minority of being proud of our driving and improving our skill base.
Sorry, but "making up their mind by slightly moving to my right whilst increasing speed" before indicating is no better than the drifters who either float from lane to lane with no indication or start indicating as they are moving over the white line. In almost every case it should be mirror, signal, manoeuver. In other words the manoeuver starts when you take your foot off the gas, apply the gas (other than for minor speed adjustments) or move the steering (again, other than for minor directional adjustments). Both your mirror checks and signalling should be accomplished before starting a manoeuver and your indicator is there to signal your intention, not confirm it. Drifting over to the right or left of your lane before indicating is meaningless and could incite panic braking from the guy in the blind spot.As regard May overtaking, my instructor waaaaaay back in 1964 did give me two bits of advice that i have never forgoten.
1) an indication by anybody IS NOT sufficient proof or authority to carry out the move,
eg a left indicator, watch his front wheels to confirm, a right indicator,just hold back until he confirms it or not. Also he did say for every 10mph you are travelling, let the indicator that amout of times bfore doing anything.
2) the other thing was the 'cutting back' into a lane over doing the overtake. He said to make sure that you give the chap behind enough 'breathing space' for him not to get humpy at it,he said make sure you see both his headlights in your rear window before moving over, and an indication left is not always required unless you need to move over a bit sooner, as the HC says keep left etc etc.
I can appreciate that with the larger rear windows of todays cars this is not always possible, (my first car was a 1946 Ford Anglia with a letter box sized window)
Also as regards the 'life saver' this was only brought home to me when i took the CBT and ventured out on two wheels. I am of the opinion that a full bike licence should be a pre requisite before you get on four wheels as you are certainly made mor aware of your surroundings,and mortality, when on two, so YES i do use it, nd it has come in handy, esp with those retards who sit just in it for a while not bothering to drop ack or overtake. ONLY in that situation do i make their mind up by slighty moving to my right whilst incresing speed (if possible) before indictating and then proceeding as above.
The Lads at Crewe also instilled the mantra
'If your intentions will cause another motorist to alter their speed,direction or course, abort the thought'
This thread and the earlier one should be made a 'sticky' if it could. The sad thing is guys like us ar in the minority of being proud of our driving and improving our skill base.
On the subject of cruise control. One of my methods of staying alert on a long journey is to use the cruise control, even in moderately heavy traffic. There is a need to judge traffic changes even more acutely to ensure smooth progress, but then I'm driving a Citroen Grand Picasso so acceleration is modest, I fully appreciate it may not be an option when driving something more powerful.
DreadUK said:
In general I do disagree with making a shoulder check on changing lanes. Our instructors rational being that if you have been checking your mirrors properly you will understand, to the make model and colour of the cars behind you, what is going on. Your rear planning should be as good as your forward planning
I would agree with that, although I wouldn't criticise someone for wanting to do shoulder checks.I quite often do shoulder checks. OK, my rearward planning should be as good as my forward planning, but sometimes it isn't. Maybe I'm a bit tired and I've allowed rearward planning to slip. Maybe I've been distracted by something. Maybe I've just lost track a bit of which vehicles are which and where they are behind me. I know when I'm not completely certain what's going on on the road behind me and if the thing that brings that to my attention is an upcoming need to change lanes, a shoulder check is a natural part of rebuilding the picture I need to plan the manoeuvre.
Sometimes, I'm well aware that a vehicle is there, I know what it is down to make, model and colour, but I'm just not quite comfortable about it's relative position and/or speed and I prefer to look at it with my eyes to confirm what's going on.
Weirdly, even when I am as certain about what's going on behind as I am about what's going on ahead, I sometimes - but not every time - do a shoulder check. No idea why.
In all my years and many thousands (likely to be well into the hundreds of thousands) of motorway miles, I think I've been caught out by vehicles in my blind spot on four occasions due to my own lack of observations. None of these incidents led to anything more serious than an aborted lane change or another driver having to slow down.
This is three times too many - I should have learned from my mistake on the first occasion.
I do not intend the number to raise to five, so my use of shoulder checks on the motorway has risen over the years rather than reduced.
This is three times too many - I should have learned from my mistake on the first occasion.
I do not intend the number to raise to five, so my use of shoulder checks on the motorway has risen over the years rather than reduced.
I find the debate about shoulder check and indicating for that matter curious. Is there any place here for habitual behaviour that we 'just do without thinking' without going through a process of deciding whether we need to? Habit, instinct, subconscious behaviour etc must play a role in many activities when driving (at least with us mere mortals) or maybe advanced motoring is a case of reducing the number of these?
MC Bodge said:
Indeed. Discounting shoulder checks based on the fact that previous observations "should" be good enough is another example of the "elitist" attitude.
Shoulder checks. Again, why wouldn't you?
Because on a relatively clear motorway and with appropriate rear observation I agree with the poster above that it isn't necessary. Nothing about being 'elitist' tbh.Shoulder checks. Again, why wouldn't you?
Don't get me wrong, if there's any doubt in my mind, I'll do a shoulder check and certainly in busier situations where traffic turnover is higher it's routine (especially 50mph average zones, driving on the busy north circular or the A12 coming into London).
Jon1967x said:
I find the debate about shoulder check and indicating for that matter curious. Is there any place here for habitual behaviour that we 'just do without thinking' without going through a process of deciding whether we need to? Habit, instinct, subconscious behaviour etc must play a role in many activities when driving (at least with us mere mortals) or maybe advanced motoring is a case of reducing the number of these?
I don't like habits in my driving. I find that the risk with 'doing without thinking' is that it can lead to a reduced level of thinking - a false sense of security that because my habit is in place, everything is OK and I don't need to consider the specifics of the situation I am facing at this moment. For example, if I were to cultivate a habit of shoulder checking every time I changed lanes, I know that my overall rearward observation would begin to suffer, because in order to maintain the habit the bit of my subconscious mind that currently grades me on how accurate and complete my understanding of what's going on behind is would be distracted by grading me on whether I looked over my shoulder regardless of whether I needed to. It would take too much conscious effort to maintain both the standard of rearward observation and the habitual shoulder check because looking over my shoulder when I know full well that there is nothing there is such an incongruous thing to do.If I spot a habit in my driving, I invariably want to get rid of it. Mind you, that could be because the reason I became aware of that habit was the error it lead to - i.e. I may have habits in my driving that are doing me good (or at least not doing me harm) and which I am unaware of precisely because they are not causing a problem.
Indicating is different. Although I know it wouldn't be good for me, I can see an argument for habitual shoulder checking because aside from the risk of unintentionally allowing habit to replace thinking, there's nothing to lose. With indicating however, good communication often depends on careful timing of signals, or possibly even deciding not to signal at all, so there are definite ways in which habitual signalling rather than thoughtful signalling can make things worse.
Edited by SK425 on Wednesday 21st May 00:13
Not all habits are "bad". Many techniques taught as part of any driver training are repeated and repeated so that less and less thought is required for the processes involved in moving the car along. This should ensure that the driver has the maximum percentage of their attention available for observing and planning for hazards, whilst using a minimum amount of mental capacity to physically drive the car.
Systematic approaches to hazards should be habitual, as should smooth use of the controls, accurate placement of the car and the muscle memory involved in operating the minor controls, switches etc.
Mirror checks should be habitual too, at the appropriate times. That's the mirror checks though - the analysis of what you've seen in your mirrors falls into the conscious part of your driving - the bit you're actually thinking about and using as you plan your way down the road. So the check can be habitual, but the analysis should be conscious.
Same with a shoulder check. When teaching learners I expect them to carry out left and right shoulder checks when moving off from stationary. At first, it's obvious that they're just moving their head - it's just a routine, or "drill" that they're carrying out, and I don't have much faith that they're actually looking and processing what they're seeing. As time goes on, and they are able to think less about what they're physically doing with the cars controls, I start to see that they're actually seeing and using the information gained from the shoulder check.
There are plenty of bad habits though. My first to second gearchange is bloody awful at the moment.
Systematic approaches to hazards should be habitual, as should smooth use of the controls, accurate placement of the car and the muscle memory involved in operating the minor controls, switches etc.
Mirror checks should be habitual too, at the appropriate times. That's the mirror checks though - the analysis of what you've seen in your mirrors falls into the conscious part of your driving - the bit you're actually thinking about and using as you plan your way down the road. So the check can be habitual, but the analysis should be conscious.
Same with a shoulder check. When teaching learners I expect them to carry out left and right shoulder checks when moving off from stationary. At first, it's obvious that they're just moving their head - it's just a routine, or "drill" that they're carrying out, and I don't have much faith that they're actually looking and processing what they're seeing. As time goes on, and they are able to think less about what they're physically doing with the cars controls, I start to see that they're actually seeing and using the information gained from the shoulder check.
There are plenty of bad habits though. My first to second gearchange is bloody awful at the moment.
g3org3y said:
MC Bodge said:
Indeed. Discounting shoulder checks based on the fact that previous observations "should" be good enough is another example of the "elitist" attitude.
Shoulder checks. Again, why wouldn't you?
Because on a relatively clear motorway and with appropriate rear observation I agree with the poster above that it isn't necessary. Nothing about being 'elitist' tbh.Shoulder checks. Again, why wouldn't you?
Don't get me wrong, if there's any doubt in my mind, I'll do a shoulder check and certainly in busier situations where traffic turnover is higher it's routine (especially 50mph average zones, driving on the busy north circular or the A12 coming into London).
A shoulder check might well not be required in 100% of cases(and there are judgements to be made in different situations), but that is different to saying that shoulder checks are not required if observations are correct. It only takes one mistake, by the fallible, rather than an infallible "highly-trained" individual, to miss somebody who has crept into a blind-spot. Advising people not to do it is concerning.
Even the highly-trained Police firearms squads and military special forces make mistakes....
MC Bodge said:
Declaring that shoulder checks aren't necessary because of some sort of superhuman/Robocop ability to always make perfect observations is where the problem lies, I believe.
Some shoulder checks are not necessary, because sometimes the powers of observation required to know, without doing a shoulder check, that there is nobody in your blind spot are so far below superhuman/Robocop levels that even fallible mortals can comfortably manage it. (Which I think might be what the first part of your second sentence says 
).I wouldn't discourage shoulder checks though - as long as they're being used to supplement the situational awareness your mirrors can give you, rather than replace it - I just wouldn't mandate them.
Regarding lane hogging, there is a part of the Highway Code which discusses not going three or more abreast with other vehicles in order for everyone to keep escape routes, or zones of safety around them. If you're in lane three coming up to overtake a vehicle in lane two, you should avoid being alongside it while that vehicle is in lane one as no one has anywhere to move to should evasive action around a hazard be necessary.
Certainly at moments when all traffic in each lane is travelling at much the same speed, I'll keep a clear space to the left of me if I'm in an overtaking lane as well as a good stopping distance ahead of me. A lot of people would see this as lane hogging, assuming I should be moving to the clear space to the left and that if I want to make faster progress I should be getting up close and personal with those ahead. There's a difference between lane hogging and keeping a good amount of space around your car so nothing takes you by surprise and you have time to observe and react to unfolding hazards.
Certainly at moments when all traffic in each lane is travelling at much the same speed, I'll keep a clear space to the left of me if I'm in an overtaking lane as well as a good stopping distance ahead of me. A lot of people would see this as lane hogging, assuming I should be moving to the clear space to the left and that if I want to make faster progress I should be getting up close and personal with those ahead. There's a difference between lane hogging and keeping a good amount of space around your car so nothing takes you by surprise and you have time to observe and react to unfolding hazards.
Blakewater said:
Regarding lane hogging, there is a part of the Highway Code which discusses not going three or more abreast with other vehicles in order for everyone to keep escape routes, or zones of safety around them. If you're in lane three coming up to overtake a vehicle in lane two, you should avoid being alongside it while that vehicle is in lane one as no one has anywhere to move to should evasive action around a hazard be necessary.
Certainly at moments when all traffic in each lane is travelling at much the same speed, I'll keep a clear space to the left of me if I'm in an overtaking lane as well as a good stopping distance ahead of me. A lot of people would see this as lane hogging, assuming I should be moving to the clear space to the left and that if I want to make faster progress I should be getting up close and personal with those ahead. There's a difference between lane hogging and keeping a good amount of space around your car so nothing takes you by surprise and you have time to observe and react to unfolding hazards.
When I undertook my police advanced course in 1995, "avoiding making a line of three vehicles abreast" was a key ingredient of advanced motorway driving. Even when travelling at very high speeds, you were expected to time your approaches to vehicles in lane 2 to avoid passing them when they were alongside vehicles in lane 1. If your obs were good, you could do it through acceleration sense only and it didn't really impede your progress, but it did start to become more difficult as the volume of traffic increased.Certainly at moments when all traffic in each lane is travelling at much the same speed, I'll keep a clear space to the left of me if I'm in an overtaking lane as well as a good stopping distance ahead of me. A lot of people would see this as lane hogging, assuming I should be moving to the clear space to the left and that if I want to make faster progress I should be getting up close and personal with those ahead. There's a difference between lane hogging and keeping a good amount of space around your car so nothing takes you by surprise and you have time to observe and react to unfolding hazards.
When I applied to take my instructor's course four years later, I had to carry out an assessed drive with full commentary. I included the three abreast rule, but was pulled up during the debrief. The school had decided that the general increase in motorway traffic had made keeping the three abreast rule increasingly difficult and they no longer expected students to apply it during high speed motorway runs. The fact that you're travelling at a much higher speed than the overtaken vehicles means that your "time alongside" is reduced to a minimum.
For general driving in heavy traffic, however, I still strongly advocate the "three abreast" (or four abreast, depending on the number of lanes) rule. As mentioned in my original post, there is a domino effect on motorways where movements in lane 1 affect vehicles in lane 2 etc. if traffic is heavy and there is an HGV in lane 2, I tend to fall into a following position just longer than the HGV and only start to pass it once the vehicle in front of me has moved forward enough to allow me to pass the HGV and sit in a following position without being alongside the HGV.
It's not a "rule" per se, - more of a general guide. Sometimes (often in heavy traffic), it's impossible to avoid three or four abreast, but it's good practice where possible.
MC Bodge said:
Even the highly-trained Police firearms squads and military special forces make mistakes....
What! even with their budget, 
On a serious note the firearms budget is massive compared to the driving school where I work, there appears to be no expense spared. However there is more chance of a member of public being killed by a job car than at the end of a barrel I believe, unfortunately because most people can drive it is seen as a tool required to do the job rather than a specialism in it's own right by the the decision makers. daz6215 said:
What! even with their budget, On a serious note the firearms budget is massive compared to the driving school where I work,
The Met is the same, for the same reason you quote...everyone can drive, how hard can it be, whereas carrying a firearm, now that's dangerous On a serious note the firearms budget is massive compared to the driving school where I work,
Try going out with an Advanced Driver that did their course 20yrs ago and has never had a proper re-classification, I doubt anyone would want an AFO that hasn't re-classified for 20yrs.
Love the article and great discussion to follow. A few opinions from me.
I do a lot of shoulder checks. I think I manage to do it without wandering now, having PRACTISED. So I would encourage others to go out and practise as well. It's not called a lifesaver for nothing, and I can see no reason why bikers can do it (on a machine where a change of centre of gravity of the rider has as much effect on the steering as a movement of the hands, unlike a car) but car drivers should seemingly be incapable.
Which brings me to my next item which was the chap(s) who have difficulty staying in position in their lane. SD encouraged them to look further ahead, sound advice as usual. I would qualify this with two further points - one is the well-worn adage "look where you want to go". Similar but slightly more specific. If you spend your time looking to the sides, I think it's likely your steering will follow. Certainly my lapses tend to follow this rule, or sometimes, surprisingly, the opposite! I look to my left, and find my steering wandering to the right, which, I assume, is due to a subconscious over-compensation with the arms. Still, I'm aware of it, so now I can work on it. The second tiny bit of advice I would offer is to use peripheral vision. This was introduced to me as a tool relatively recently and it's fabulous. You can train yourself to look at two things at once. Honest. Use it on motorways to monitor the lane lines in the foreground as you use your main vision looking much further ahead. On country roads, set up for a bend, then use it to monitor your position WRT the verge or the centre line as you drive the bend with vision up. It's, literally, a revelation. I hope it's useful.
Third, the excellent advice about looking for closing gaps. One of the pleasures of motorway driving is being able to anticipate the movements of others, and make space for them when possible. Moving to lane 3 to allow someone out into lane 2 before they've even become aware they're going to need to, is one of the little amusements that keeps us alert and motivated. It's amusing when you then spot them looking helplessly around in their mirrors for the sight of your car which they knew was there a little while ago, but more satisfying when they acknowledge the thought showing they were actually paying attention. Even better is when someone else does it for you - a frighteningly rare occurrence these days, but great when it happens.
Lastly a big thumbs-up for the three-abreast rule. I try to always bear it in mind even when weight of traffic makes it hard to enforce.
I do a lot of shoulder checks. I think I manage to do it without wandering now, having PRACTISED. So I would encourage others to go out and practise as well. It's not called a lifesaver for nothing, and I can see no reason why bikers can do it (on a machine where a change of centre of gravity of the rider has as much effect on the steering as a movement of the hands, unlike a car) but car drivers should seemingly be incapable.
Which brings me to my next item which was the chap(s) who have difficulty staying in position in their lane. SD encouraged them to look further ahead, sound advice as usual. I would qualify this with two further points - one is the well-worn adage "look where you want to go". Similar but slightly more specific. If you spend your time looking to the sides, I think it's likely your steering will follow. Certainly my lapses tend to follow this rule, or sometimes, surprisingly, the opposite! I look to my left, and find my steering wandering to the right, which, I assume, is due to a subconscious over-compensation with the arms. Still, I'm aware of it, so now I can work on it. The second tiny bit of advice I would offer is to use peripheral vision. This was introduced to me as a tool relatively recently and it's fabulous. You can train yourself to look at two things at once. Honest. Use it on motorways to monitor the lane lines in the foreground as you use your main vision looking much further ahead. On country roads, set up for a bend, then use it to monitor your position WRT the verge or the centre line as you drive the bend with vision up. It's, literally, a revelation. I hope it's useful.
Third, the excellent advice about looking for closing gaps. One of the pleasures of motorway driving is being able to anticipate the movements of others, and make space for them when possible. Moving to lane 3 to allow someone out into lane 2 before they've even become aware they're going to need to, is one of the little amusements that keeps us alert and motivated. It's amusing when you then spot them looking helplessly around in their mirrors for the sight of your car which they knew was there a little while ago, but more satisfying when they acknowledge the thought showing they were actually paying attention. Even better is when someone else does it for you - a frighteningly rare occurrence these days, but great when it happens.
Lastly a big thumbs-up for the three-abreast rule. I try to always bear it in mind even when weight of traffic makes it hard to enforce.
Edited by Mr Grayson on Wednesday 28th May 22:08
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff