contact position
Discussion
A comment has been made in another thread about not favouring the adoption of a contact position for overtaking. It does seem to be a contentious issue - views of very able drivers I have spoken with vary from saying 'i overtake from a follow', to 'i get as close as I can - it could be a car's length if i can control it.' And every shade of grey in between.
So what do people think?
Personally I do use the contact position, sometimes quite a close one. The potential problems with this are obvious, but I mitigate these by aiming to occupy this position for a short a time as possible (frequently passing through it rather than remaining in it), keeping my view open throughout, and dropping back at the first sign of trouble. By doing this I feel I have more control over the situation than I would by getting committed too early.
But I'm happy to hear other opinions.....
So what do people think?
Personally I do use the contact position, sometimes quite a close one. The potential problems with this are obvious, but I mitigate these by aiming to occupy this position for a short a time as possible (frequently passing through it rather than remaining in it), keeping my view open throughout, and dropping back at the first sign of trouble. By doing this I feel I have more control over the situation than I would by getting committed too early.
But I'm happy to hear other opinions.....
In my view there are a number of risks associated with the contact position, but before I go in to them, please bear a couple of things in mind. Firstly, just because something is written in a book (even a highly regarded book used as a national training aid), doesn't mean it's 100% correct.
And secondly, just because some opinionated bloke with a silly username says on an Internet forum that he disagrees with that section of the book, doesn't mean that it's 100% wrong.
In other words, I'm afraid this is something you'll have to make your own minds up on, but here's my contribution to the debate...
The contact position is a preparatory stage in the overtaking process. It involves moving from a normal following position (2 seconds under normal circumstances behind a car), into a much closer following position of 1 second or slightly less. It comes after the driver has identified a potential overtaking opportunity, and after they have selected an appropriately flexible gear, but it comes before the driver moves fully offside and before they commit to the overtake.
Let's start with a review of the advantages of the following (not the contact) position.
1. It allows you to maintain a good view of the road ahead, which can be improved by minor deviations to the nearside and offside.
2. You can stop safely if the vehicle in front brakes suddenly without warning.
3. It allows you to extend your stopping distance to make it safer for following vehicles and;
4. It allows you to move quickly into an overtaking position when the opportunity arises.
(My apologies if these aren't word perfect. I haven't actually read Roadcraft for a couple of years, but they're not too far off).
So, Roadcraft heavily promotes these very clear advantages, but then, almost on the next page, it completely contradicts itself by then promoting a position which completely undermines all four advantages.
I know that the contact position is only recommended as a preparatory phase for the overtake which is expected to happen a very short time later, but even for that very short time, adopting a much closer following position immediately reduces your view of the road, reduces your ability to stop in an emergency without hitting the car in front, reduces your stopping distance for following vehicles and compromises your view of the expected overtaking opportunity.
Just at the point that you're looking to overtake.
It doesn't make sense to me. It didn't make sense to my colleagues at my force driving school and even from the very first driving course under the "new" Roadcraft (1994?), our students were told to ignore this small section, which was crossed out of the schools' copies.
Now, those of you familiar with my posts should have realised that I'm not the type to blindly follow instructions without questioning the reasons behind them or without coming to my own conclusions. There were a number of other aspects of police driver training with which I fundamentally disagreed, but when I was instructing, when I was driving operationally, and when I've been driving for myself, I've never wavered from my disagreement with the contact position.
I'm not averse to driving very close to vehicles in front. Anyone who has undertaken a close protection drivers course or seen a cat A prisoner convoy will know what I'm talking about. Some of the pursuit tactics employed by the police also require very close proximity driving, which is a skill in itself, but should only be used in those very particular and extremely specialised circumstances.
For normal driving, under normal circumstances, even for higher trained drivers, I do not believe that the additional risks involved in the contact position are worth it for the marginal benefit of slightly reducing your time exposed to oncoming traffic.
If the gap available to you for an overtake is so tight that it requires the contact position, my advice would be to drop back and wait. If you sit in the right position and look in the right places, a nice safe overtake will present itself to you shortly.
And secondly, just because some opinionated bloke with a silly username says on an Internet forum that he disagrees with that section of the book, doesn't mean that it's 100% wrong.
In other words, I'm afraid this is something you'll have to make your own minds up on, but here's my contribution to the debate...
The contact position is a preparatory stage in the overtaking process. It involves moving from a normal following position (2 seconds under normal circumstances behind a car), into a much closer following position of 1 second or slightly less. It comes after the driver has identified a potential overtaking opportunity, and after they have selected an appropriately flexible gear, but it comes before the driver moves fully offside and before they commit to the overtake.
Let's start with a review of the advantages of the following (not the contact) position.
1. It allows you to maintain a good view of the road ahead, which can be improved by minor deviations to the nearside and offside.
2. You can stop safely if the vehicle in front brakes suddenly without warning.
3. It allows you to extend your stopping distance to make it safer for following vehicles and;
4. It allows you to move quickly into an overtaking position when the opportunity arises.
(My apologies if these aren't word perfect. I haven't actually read Roadcraft for a couple of years, but they're not too far off).
So, Roadcraft heavily promotes these very clear advantages, but then, almost on the next page, it completely contradicts itself by then promoting a position which completely undermines all four advantages.
I know that the contact position is only recommended as a preparatory phase for the overtake which is expected to happen a very short time later, but even for that very short time, adopting a much closer following position immediately reduces your view of the road, reduces your ability to stop in an emergency without hitting the car in front, reduces your stopping distance for following vehicles and compromises your view of the expected overtaking opportunity.
Just at the point that you're looking to overtake.
It doesn't make sense to me. It didn't make sense to my colleagues at my force driving school and even from the very first driving course under the "new" Roadcraft (1994?), our students were told to ignore this small section, which was crossed out of the schools' copies.
Now, those of you familiar with my posts should have realised that I'm not the type to blindly follow instructions without questioning the reasons behind them or without coming to my own conclusions. There were a number of other aspects of police driver training with which I fundamentally disagreed, but when I was instructing, when I was driving operationally, and when I've been driving for myself, I've never wavered from my disagreement with the contact position.
I'm not averse to driving very close to vehicles in front. Anyone who has undertaken a close protection drivers course or seen a cat A prisoner convoy will know what I'm talking about. Some of the pursuit tactics employed by the police also require very close proximity driving, which is a skill in itself, but should only be used in those very particular and extremely specialised circumstances.
For normal driving, under normal circumstances, even for higher trained drivers, I do not believe that the additional risks involved in the contact position are worth it for the marginal benefit of slightly reducing your time exposed to oncoming traffic.
If the gap available to you for an overtake is so tight that it requires the contact position, my advice would be to drop back and wait. If you sit in the right position and look in the right places, a nice safe overtake will present itself to you shortly.
One other point specific to police driver training is that the contact position is taught for overtaking, so practised on single carriageways/m'ways etc, then further down the line when blue light training is introduced, what are the students told....hang back wait for them to see the lights and hear the noise!
Seen it many a time when a confused student is saying "but last week I had to close them right down", ah yes...."but that was last week!"
Seen it many a time when a confused student is saying "but last week I had to close them right down", ah yes...."but that was last week!"
Just a couple of points I'd add to what's already been said.
1) It doesn't 'always' reduce your view ahead severely, i.e. in a curved path (looking to overtake out of a bend) much less so than in a narrow lane straight road.
2) By using it you will get some overtakes that you simply won't get by not using it.
3) There's risk in all driving, it's how much you see in an individual activity (or way of doing it) & what you are willing to accept to achieve an objective that you wouldn't be able to achieve without taking those risks.
As Reg says, it's something you have to make your own mind up about, but in 'normal' everyday driving the level of progress required to even remotely try to justify it just isn't a factor. Also you can't lose sight of the fact how others (careful, competent drivers) may view it & they ultimately form the notional pair of eyes judging whether your actions amount to careless/dangerous driving etc.
1) It doesn't 'always' reduce your view ahead severely, i.e. in a curved path (looking to overtake out of a bend) much less so than in a narrow lane straight road.
2) By using it you will get some overtakes that you simply won't get by not using it.
3) There's risk in all driving, it's how much you see in an individual activity (or way of doing it) & what you are willing to accept to achieve an objective that you wouldn't be able to achieve without taking those risks.
As Reg says, it's something you have to make your own mind up about, but in 'normal' everyday driving the level of progress required to even remotely try to justify it just isn't a factor. Also you can't lose sight of the fact how others (careful, competent drivers) may view it & they ultimately form the notional pair of eyes judging whether your actions amount to careless/dangerous driving etc.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th May 07:01
vonhosen said:
2) By using it you will get some overtakes that you simply won't get by not using it.
In my experience, I see more overtake opportunities not taken as a result of the car going in the wrong direction (ie failing to have a positive close) rather than starting too far back. Catching up 5mph is harder than closing 25m (the difference between 1s and 2s at 60mph). Although starting too far back is definitely a contributing factor.You are committed to the overtake at the point where you can't stop behind the car in front if it decides to chuck out the anchor -- that's a combination of following distance and relative speed. This is often earlier than the point where drivers decide that the overtake is on -- and I'd suggest is getting the two the wrong way round.
Of course, a 1-second follow isn't that close: it's hardly below attentive reaction time (and on any motorway on any day, you will see queue of traffic in follows of under 0.5s). However it does mean that a disproportionate amount of your attention has to be on the driver in front and the hazards that he is about to see and react to, rather than longer range scanning and planning. Extended time in the contact position can suck a driver into tunnel vision, as well as being uncomfortable for the target.
vonhosen said:
Also you can't lose sight of the fact how others (careful, competent drivers) may view it & they ultimately form the notional pair of eyes judging whether your actions amount to careless/dangerous driving etc.
Exactly, and if one day a Hendon car get's brake tested by a "frightened m.o.p" who panicked, who will be to blame? Yet it is still taught.Contact position?!?! - I get that it 'may' be used by specialist drivers under special circumstances but....it definitely aint for me...ever. How much time could I possibly save compared to what I would be risking?! Nah, I'll hang back and wait. Got towed 3 miles on a solid bar after a recent breakdown and absolutely hated being that close to the AA van even though I knew I was on a solid bar!
SnowyQuattro said:
Contact position?!?! - I get that it 'may' be used by specialist drivers under special circumstances but
But it's not really, maybe a surveillance vehicle might use it if making progress without lights and sirens, but in all other circumstances, with blue lights and sirens a police driver will be doing the exact opposite. omegac said:
One other point specific to police driver training is that the contact position is taught for overtaking, so practised on single carriageways/m'ways etc, then further down the line when blue light training is introduced, what are the students told....hang back wait for them to see the lights and hear the noise!
Seen it many a time when a confused student is saying "but last week I had to close them right down", ah yes...."but that was last week!"
I don't see the confusion. Contact position is used to overtake a vehicle that is continuing on its way. If you're expecting the vehicle to slow down or move over it changes the game to hang back and let them sort themselves out. This will happen at times even without warning equipment - as in where the target vehicle is turning off, stopping, or more rarely slowing to allow you to pass. Seen it many a time when a confused student is saying "but last week I had to close them right down", ah yes...."but that was last week!"
greygoose said:
I think the contact position can be a bit intimidating for the driver who is about to be overtaken too.
Thiss, at least for normal driving (which includes all civilian driving no matter how much you'd like to "make progress")You have no idea who the driver ahead is, how competent they are or how they might react (or not) to perceived aggression. Broadly, they can react in one of 3 ways:
Not at all
Slow down (including brake testing you)
Speed up to try and get space
Two out of those 3 can seriously undermine your planned overtake and, if the opportunity is so close that you might need the contact position, you'll have very little time to re-think / react so will (should) probably end up aborting anyway.
Having said that, closing to a second or so probably won't get a reacton at all seeing as so many drivers seem to think that's where they should be in the first place
vonhosen said:
Just a couple of points I'd add to what's already been said.
1) It doesn't 'always' reduce your view ahead severely, i.e. in a curved path (looking to overtake out of a bend) much less so than in a narrow lane straight road.
2) By using it you will get some overtakes that you simply won't get by not using it.
3) There's risk in all driving, it's how much you see in an individual activity (or way of doing it) & what you are willing to accept to achieve an objective that you wouldn't be able to achieve without taking those risks.
As Reg says, it's something you have to make your own mind up about, but in 'normal' everyday driving the level of progress required to even remotely try to justify it just isn't a factor. Also you can't lose sight of the fact how others (careful, competent drivers) may view it & they ultimately form the notional pair of eyes judging whether your actions amount to careless/dangerous driving etc.
Good post.1) It doesn't 'always' reduce your view ahead severely, i.e. in a curved path (looking to overtake out of a bend) much less so than in a narrow lane straight road.
2) By using it you will get some overtakes that you simply won't get by not using it.
3) There's risk in all driving, it's how much you see in an individual activity (or way of doing it) & what you are willing to accept to achieve an objective that you wouldn't be able to achieve without taking those risks.
As Reg says, it's something you have to make your own mind up about, but in 'normal' everyday driving the level of progress required to even remotely try to justify it just isn't a factor. Also you can't lose sight of the fact how others (careful, competent drivers) may view it & they ultimately form the notional pair of eyes judging whether your actions amount to careless/dangerous driving etc.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th May 07:01
Another point to consider is that if the contact position is assumed, and then circumstances change and the overtake is no longer 'on' and so you drop back accordingly, this can be construed by the general public as a mistake/poor driving. (whereas it is actually a much safer technique than staring the preparation for an overtake halfway along a straight, as a lot of the general public seem to do)
omegac said:
Z.B said:
I don't see the confusion.
Because the week before the student is told, make progress, close them down, one second from their bumper....the following week, noise and lights go on, adrenaline goes through the roof...and so what position do they naturally adopt?If use of contact position has been adequately caveated early in the course, and the candidates have been briefed on the hazards of blue light running, surely it isn't a great intellectual leap to realise it might not be wise to be up the back of someone who may well do something daft?
Also, isn't positioning generally going to be quite different on blue lights from anything that could reasonably be taught without them? So it will always be alien initially?
Having said that, I've seen plenty of blue light runs that looked more white-knuckle than they needed to be so maybe you do have a point.... I can also see why a police driving school might want normal driving overtakes to use the same technique as for blue light runs.
Out of interest, can anyone say how widespread the teaching of overtaking without a contact position is? All the police drivers I've driven with have used it, and I think it would be expected by IAM and similar....
Also, those that teach this alternative approach.... What would you prefer that page of Roadcraft to say?
Edited by Z.B on Thursday 8th May 16:29
Personally a contact position isnt for me.
I find it can
I find it can
- cause the driver in front to close the gap to the car in front of it if you are attempting to pass a line of traffic in seperate manouvers.
- cause the car behind to close on you so you lose your safety net behind.
- cause you to miss more chances than you would otherwise get due to loss of vision.
- results in more rude gestures and headlight flashes than you would have otherwise received.
Z.B said:
Well I guess if that's what you see that's what you see! I'm a little surprised though for several reasons....
Out of interest, can anyone say how widespread the teaching of overtaking without a contact position is? All the police drivers I've driven with have used it, and I think it would be expected by IAM and similar....
It doesn't happen every time, but just at times it can cause confusion. I never had a problem with contact position on a road other than D/C or M'Way, just on those roads I found it uncomfortable and in my opinion looked unprofessional. And as I said, when a student questions the instructor with the "what if they brake test" they get the "do you want to stay on this course" from some instructors who can't justify it.Out of interest, can anyone say how widespread the teaching of overtaking without a contact position is? All the police drivers I've driven with have used it, and I think it would be expected by IAM and similar....
Re your other point, the Met still teach contact for three stage overtaking, i.e. on a A or B road, but I think this thread originated from the Motorway thread which is where I was saying I didn't like doing it and don't agree with it.
omegac said:
I found it uncomfortable and in my opinion looked unprofessional.
I think unless there is an emergency then it isnt worth the risk.
Im not perfect, i make plenty of mitakes when driving; but i do try to minimise the risk as much as is possible. Closing up to the vehicle in front isnt one im happy taking. I do it some times, yes. But most of the time id rather wait until a gap where i can pass from behind, with a perfectly clear gap and plenty of stopping distance.
Also, if you are looking for an overtake, then how do you know the car behind you isnt too? If they go and have to drop back in for whatever reason, what are you going to do?
I don't think it's possible to come up with a definitive answer to this one. The problem is that those of us who don't recommend it have some valid reasons for doing so, but you can never get away from the fact that it is a Roadcraft approved technique which continues to be taught by some police driving schools.
The advantages of the contact position are valid and the argument hinges on where different people stand in relation to whether the associated risks are acceptable or not.
On the whole I respect the views of those who promote the contact position and at the same time it seems that the proponents of the position also respect my views on the matter.
Shall we all just agree to disagree?
Yes?
Pint anyone?
Vons buying...
The advantages of the contact position are valid and the argument hinges on where different people stand in relation to whether the associated risks are acceptable or not.
On the whole I respect the views of those who promote the contact position and at the same time it seems that the proponents of the position also respect my views on the matter.
Shall we all just agree to disagree?
Yes?
Pint anyone?
Vons buying...
R_U_LOCAL said:
I don't think it's possible to come up with a definitive answer to this one. The problem is that those of us who don't recommend it have some valid reasons for doing so, but you can never get away from the fact that it is a Roadcraft approved technique which continues to be taught by some police driving schools.
The advantages of the contact position are valid and the argument hinges on where different people stand in relation to whether the associated risks are acceptable or not.
On the whole I respect the views of those who promote the contact position and at the same time it seems that the proponents of the position also respect my views on the matter.
Shall we all just agree to disagree?
Yes?
Pint anyone?
Von's buying...
Whooosh.The advantages of the contact position are valid and the argument hinges on where different people stand in relation to whether the associated risks are acceptable or not.
On the whole I respect the views of those who promote the contact position and at the same time it seems that the proponents of the position also respect my views on the matter.
Shall we all just agree to disagree?
Yes?
Pint anyone?
Von's buying...
That was TripleS arriving, that was.
omegac said:
Z.B said:
Well I guess if that's what you see that's what you see! I'm a little surprised though for several reasons....
Out of interest, can anyone say how widespread the teaching of overtaking without a contact position is? All the police drivers I've driven with have used it, and I think it would be expected by IAM and similar....
It doesn't happen every time, but just at times it can cause confusion. I never had a problem with contact position on a road other than D/C or M'Way, just on those roads I found it uncomfortable and in my opinion looked unprofessional. And as I said, when a student questions the instructor with the "what if they brake test" they get the "do you want to stay on this course" from some instructors who can't justify it.Out of interest, can anyone say how widespread the teaching of overtaking without a contact position is? All the police drivers I've driven with have used it, and I think it would be expected by IAM and similar....
Re your other point, the Met still teach contact for three stage overtaking, i.e. on a A or B road, but I think this thread originated from the Motorway thread which is where I was saying I didn't like doing it and don't agree with it.
Whilst the contact position on single carriageway helps get you bin the optimum position to make the critical decision, on the motorway it really boils down to bullying people out of the way which is far more dubious, though effective at times.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff