Indicating by rote?

[gothatway]

RobM77 said:

I've lost count of the number of times I've been waiting at a junction for a car to pass and they get slower and slower and you wonder what's going on, and then finally they turn into the road you're on and you realise that you could have pulled out ages ago - that's very annoying!

...

(you should never trust an indicator)

Hmmm.

I find I'm consciously indicating less these days, as a result of realising that making the decision whether or not to indicate emphasises the need for careful observation. I do have the luxury of doing a lot of driving on empty rural roads with good visibility through fences and over fields and ditches. But even on bigger roads, I indicate less than I did. For example joining a major road or motorway from a sliproad when there is no traffic on the major road - why indicate (and should it make any difference if there is someone behind me on the sliproad) ? If you're in a lane which is only going left (or straight on or right) at a junction - why indicate (just adding to visual noise for other road users) ? If I'm behind another vehicle and we're approaching a junction where I'm turning left, and there is no other road user to benefit from my signal, should I signal solely for the "benefit" of the guy in front ? I would add that in more crowded environments, typically urban ones, I am much more likely to indicate without having explicitly seen someone who might benefit.

[SVS]

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

[Vipers]

Driving up Sough Anderson Drive in Aberdeen in the mornings, two lanes of traffic, vast majority enter the roundabout at 6 and leave at 12, (this is a simple roundabout 4 exits).

I am invariable in the outside lane, and I am in a very very minority who bother to indicate left as we pass 9 o'clock. The vast majority enter and leave as I do.

Then I was following a car driver home the other week he enters at 12 indicating right, as he passed 3 he changes to a left and exits at 6, mistake I thought, but he did the same for the next three roundabouts.

Is it so difficult to get a simple procedure right.

Back to the question, I indicate regardless, sorts of ties in with my "Mirror, signal, manouevour" way of driving, if you don't feel the need, don't do it, but looking at the HC, can't see where it says you shouldn't, could be wrong of course.

Bit of humour, many moons ago just before budget day, I was in the Navy, and our boss who was away called me and asked if I would take his Morris 1000 traveller out and fill it up, no worries I said.

Off I go to the nearest petrol station in Portsmouth, every time I came to a junction, done the right thing, Mirror, signal, manouevour", cars were tooting me, waving their hands, thinking something was about to fall off, indicated and pulled in. As I got out to check the car I noticed the offside indicator was blinking.

He had fitted a switch for the indicators himself, and what I thought was left was right.............

[Dr Jekyll]

SVS said:

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

How on earth does that work? You still have to decide whether or not your move might affect anyone else.

[vonhosen]

Dr Jekyll said:

SVS said:

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

How on earth does that work? You still have to decide whether or not your move might affect anyone else.

One less thing to think about.

IAM (etc) way
1) Will it mislead? No
2) Will somebody benefit? No
= No signal


SVS (etc) way
1) Will it mislead? No
= Signal

[Vipers]

SVS said:

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

If indicating results in "Task Loading", and makes it unsafe for you, (which it must do as you say it makes you safer when you don't have to do it), I would consider giving up driving.

[gothatway]

Vipers said:

Bit of humour, many moons ago just before budget day, I was in the Navy, and our boss who was away called me and asked if I would take his Morris 1000 traveller out and fill it up, no worries I said.

Off I go to the nearest petrol station in Portsmouth, every time I came to a junction, done the right thing, Mirror, signal, manouevour", cars were tooting me, waving their hands, thinking something was about to fall off, indicated and pulled in. As I got out to check the car I noticed the offside indicator was blinking.

He had fitted a switch for the indicators himself, and what I thought was left was right.............

I guess it was one of these switches, quite possible fitted correctly but potentially confusing anyway : http://www.classicvehicleandparts.co.uk/id278.html

[Vipers]

gothatway said:

I guess it was one of these switches, quite possible fitted correctly but potentially confusing anyway : http://www.classicvehicleandparts.co.uk/id278.html

Good find, exactly the same. Might had been clearer to the user if fitted upside down, oh well, live and learn.

I thought putting the switch to the left was the left indicator.

[Bigends]

Vipers said:

SVS said:

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

If indicating results in "Task Loading", and makes it unsafe for you, (which it must do as you say it makes you safer when you don't have to do it), I would consider giving up driving.


Task loading? its a car not a jet fighter

[vonhosen]

Vipers said:

SVS said:

Personally, I prefer to signal unless it misleads.

This is because it reduces task loading when I'm driving, which I've found makes me safer in many situations.

If indicating results in "Task Loading", and makes it unsafe for you, (which it must do as you say it makes you safer when you don't have to do it), I would consider giving up driving.

1) A frequent example I see with it is a driver coming down to a roundabout intending to turn left, nobody visible, so doesn't signal at that stage. Approaching the roundabout with limited vision to the right, planning to stop but looking to go. On approach decides yes I can go & as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1. The driver either gives no signal or a late signal to the driver who approached from exit 1.

2) Could have been a case of driver coming down to a roundabout intending to turn left, nobody visible & a signal isn't going to mislead so gives the signal. Approaching the roundabout with limited vision to the right, planning to stop looking to go. On approach decides yes I can go & as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1. The driver has given a signal in good time & didn't have to worry about a vehicle approaching from exit 1.

I personally consider option 2) preferable to option 1). If a car hadn't appeared in option 2) & a signal had been given......so what.

[SVS]

Thank you Von. That's a very good example.

vonhosen said:

One less thing to think about.

IAM (etc) way
1) Will it mislead? No
2) Will somebody benefit? No
= No signal


SVS (etc) way
1) Will it mislead? No
= Signal

Quite so.

Colin, I'd argue that task loading is relevant to some riding circumstances. If I'm trying to find a new route through busy parts of central London that I don't know well, in the rain on a dark winter evening, with my glasses fogging up and rain on my visor making it harder to see clearly, fighting to keep warm in winter temperatures, perhaps at the end of a tiring day at work ... Then I'm happy to have one less thing to think about, especially if it's a long ride in circumstances like these.

Edited by SVS on Sunday 24th May 18:31

[RobM77]

gothatway said:

RobM77 said:

I've lost count of the number of times I've been waiting at a junction for a car to pass and they get slower and slower and you wonder what's going on, and then finally they turn into the road you're on and you realise that you could have pulled out ages ago - that's very annoying!

...

(you should never trust an indicator)

Hmmm.

I find I'm consciously indicating less these days, as a result of realising that making the decision whether or not to indicate emphasises the need for careful observation. I do have the luxury of doing a lot of driving on empty rural roads with good visibility through fences and over fields and ditches. But even on bigger roads, I indicate less than I did. For example joining a major road or motorway from a sliproad when there is no traffic on the major road - why indicate (and should it make any difference if there is someone behind me on the sliproad) ? If you're in a lane which is only going left (or straight on or right) at a junction - why indicate (just adding to visual noise for other road users) ? If I'm behind another vehicle and we're approaching a junction where I'm turning left, and there is no other road user to benefit from my signal, should I signal solely for the "benefit" of the guy in front ? I would add that in more crowded environments, typically urban ones, I am much more likely to indicate without having explicitly seen someone who might benefit.

As I've said many times on this very thread, you should never trust an indicator if it's a matter of avoiding a crash, moreso a slightly embarrassing moment where you accidentally cause someone to slow down etc. In the above scenario, I would have been sat at the junction out of the goodness of my heart not wanting to pull out in front of the other driver and make him uncomfortable - not dangerous, but just a bit uncomfortable.

[gothatway]

vonhosen said:

as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1

But the "never rely on someone else's signal" principle means that the driver who has appeared at exit 1 should ignore any signal you did give anyway. Reductio ad absurdum, perhaps, hence I feel the need to add a ;-)

[Vipers]

vonhosen said:

1) A frequent example I see with it is a driver coming down to a roundabout intending to turn left, nobody visible, so doesn't signal at that stage. Approaching the roundabout with limited vision to the right, planning to stop but looking to go. On approach decides yes I can go & as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1. The driver either gives no signal or a late signal to the driver who approached from exit 1.

2) Could have been a case of driver coming down to a roundabout intending to turn left, nobody visible & a signal isn't going to mislead so gives the signal. Approaching the roundabout with limited vision to the right, planning to stop looking to go. On approach decides yes I can go & as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1. The driver has given a signal in good time & didn't have to worry about a vehicle approaching from exit 1.

I personally consider option 2) preferable to option 1). If a car hadn't appeared in option 2) & a signal had been given......so what.

Agree.

[RobM77]

me too - agreed.

[vonhosen]

gothatway said:

vonhosen said:

as he makes the decision & takes a gear to go a car has appeared at exit 1

But the "never rely on someone else's signal" principle means that the driver who has appeared at exit 1 should ignore any signal you did give anyway. Reductio ad absurdum, perhaps, hence I feel the need to add a ;-)

No he shouldn't rely 'on that alone', but it's one of the things he might consider, or else we are at the stage that nobody should bother signalling at all because nobody else should rely on the signal given anyway.