Indicating on motorways advice needed
Discussion
RobM77 said:
powerstroke said:
If you are driving something german thats white or silver you only use indicators when entering or exiting your lane to cross the other two lanes to join or leave the motorway and then only in very heavy traffic, indicating at any other time is a sign of weakness!!! and remember its signal manoeuvre mirror in anything german with 4 cylinders or less that isn't borght and payed for i.e. on PCP or a company car...
Virtually nobody indicates properly anymore, and I reckon on my commute around half of people don't touch their indicators at all. It's got nothing to do with the make of car that person happens to drive, nor the country that car was made in. 
Anderson Drive in Aberdeen has numerous roundabouts, all basic a 4 road type of roundabout, followed a bloke home the other day, enter at 12, indicating right, passes 3 indicates left and exit at 6, thought he might have made a mistake.
He did the same on every roundabout.
Going to work two lanes enter at 6 and two lanes exit at 12, so both lanes are just about used for going straight over.
Me, enter at 6 no indicators, pass 9, checking inside lane, indicate left and exit at 12. Everyone else does the same except only on a rare occasion do they bother to indicate before exiting.
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
Next time you are on a motorway, try to notice whether people who indicate change lanes more or less considerately than those who don't. Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
waremark said:
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
Next time you are on a motorway, try to notice whether people who indicate change lanes more or less considerately than those who don't. Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
I dared to stopped short of a KEEP CLEAR box on a roundabout yesterday as the exit was blocked, car behind me startes tooting, some people.
Just off to my commute through Aberdeen, where for some unexplained reason, 99 percent of cars don't even have indicators fittest
waremark said:
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
Next time you are on a motorway, try to notice whether people who indicate change lanes more or less considerately than those who don't. Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
It's the 27th October and nothing posted on this thread for over 12 days!!!Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
So, here goes. WD39, if when travelling on a motorway or dual carriageway with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, ie. one of your "any situations", would you signal when changing lanes?
If your answer is... "If there's nobody within half a mile or more I wouldn't be changing lanes", then there's nothing more to be said. On the hand hand, if you can envisage situations where you might wish to change lanes with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, I would be interested to hear your answer to my question and, if the answer is yes, your reasons for doing so.
Many thanks.
Edited by johnao on Tuesday 27th October 09:49
johnao said:
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
It's the 27th October and nothing posted on this thread for over 12 days!!!Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
So, here goes. WD39, if when travelling on a motorway or dual carriageway with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, ie. one of your "any situations", would you signal when changing lanes?
If your answer is... "If there's nobody within half a mile or more I wouldn't be changing lanes", then there's nothing more to be said. On the hand hand, if you can envisage situations where you might wish to change lanes with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, I would be interested to hear your answer to my question and, if the answer is yes, your reasons for doing so.
Many thanks.
Edited by johnao on Tuesday 27th October 09:49
Vipers said:
johnao said:
...if when travelling on a motorway or dual carriageway with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, ie. one of your "any situations", would you signal when changing lanes?
If your answer is... "If there's nobody within half a mile or more I wouldn't be changing lanes", then there's nothing more to be said. On the hand hand, if you can envisage situations where you might wish to change lanes with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, I would be interested to hear your answer to my question and, if the answer is yes, your reasons for doing so.
Many thanks.
Not aimed at me I know, but does it hurt, I don't think the HC says mirror, don't signal, manoeuvre. So provided you have checked your mirror, does it hurt.If your answer is... "If there's nobody within half a mile or more I wouldn't be changing lanes", then there's nothing more to be said. On the hand hand, if you can envisage situations where you might wish to change lanes with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, I would be interested to hear your answer to my question and, if the answer is yes, your reasons for doing so.
Many thanks.
My original question was ... would you signal in the circumstances outlined? I think your answer is... yes you would.
I then posed a subsequent question of... and if the answer is yes, why would you do it? I think what you're saying is... "would it do any harm if you did signal in the circumstances outlined?".
The answer to your question is, of course, no it wouldn't do any harm. But there are many things that one can do that wouldn't do any harm but would be utterly pointless. As one Class 1 Traffic Officer said to me on this very subject... "would you enter a room, determine that it is completely empty, and shout... "HELLO"! I don't think you would. So, why would you give a signal if you knew there was nobody there?"
The Highway Code is not quite as black and white as some imply. At para 103 (2007 edition) it says, inter alia, "Signals warn and inform other road users of your intended actions. Use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off."
So, one could infer that para 103 of the Highway Code is not suggesting that one needs to signal if there are no other road users who would benefit... particularly if there was no one within half a mile or more, as cited in my example.
johnao said:
WD39 said:
Six pages and still going strong!
Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
It's the 27th October and nothing posted on this thread for over 12 days!!!Let me try and sum up in one sentence: When changing direction on a motorway, in any situation, mirror, signal, manoevre. Que!
So, here goes. WD39, if when travelling on a motorway or dual carriageway with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, ie. one of your "any situations", would you signal when changing lanes?
If your answer is... "If there's nobody within half a mile or more I wouldn't be changing lanes", then there's nothing more to be said. On the hand hand, if you can envisage situations where you might wish to change lanes with no other vehicles within half a mile or more, I would be interested to hear your answer to my question and, if the answer is yes, your reasons for doing so.
Many thanks.
Edited by johnao on Tuesday 27th October 09:49
Thank you for your response to my post regarding 'mirror, signal, manoevre etc. In reply I would like to say that:
1) I indicate at every available opportunity.
2) It may be motorway, DC, double or single lane.
3) It could be three in the afternoon or three in the morning.
4) The fact that there is no other traffic is immaterial to my signalling.
5) My indicating occurs on filter lanes, lanes with directional arrows and other'obvious' moves.
6) I also indicate when pulling into a parking bay.
7) I have always done all the above since I passed my driving test in april 1970.
8) This positive driving procedure was learnt from my late father.
9) I am not an automatum. Each indication is a conscious move in line with traffic and conditions at the time.
10) Er....that's it.
WD39 said:
1) to 6)...
7) I have always done all the above since I passed my driving test in april 1970.
8) This positive driving procedure was learnt from my late father.
9) I am not an automatum. Each indication is a conscious move in line with traffic and conditions at the time.
10) Er....that's it.
In paragraphs 1) to 6) you've cited many instances when you would signal, but haven't explained why you would signal. Is the answer contained within paragraphs 7) and 8)? I'm just curious to understand the thought process involved. 7) I have always done all the above since I passed my driving test in april 1970.
8) This positive driving procedure was learnt from my late father.
9) I am not an automatum. Each indication is a conscious move in line with traffic and conditions at the time.
10) Er....that's it.
Incidentally, I have never suggested that you were an automaton; and your confirmation that you are not should be sufficient to dispel any doubts that others may have had. So, that being the case, I'd be grateful if you could explain the conscious thought process that is involved in deciding to indicate... "in line with traffic conditions at the time", if the traffic conditions are such that there are no other road users within half a mile or more when changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway.
Many thanks.
johnao said:
WD39 said:
1) to 6)...
7) I have always done all the above since I passed my driving test in april 1970.
8) This positive driving procedure was learnt from my late father.
9) I am not an automatum. Each indication is a conscious move in line with traffic and conditions at the time.
10) Er....that's it.
In paragraphs 1) to 6) you've cited many instances when you would signal, but haven't explained why you would signal. Is the answer contained within paragraphs 7) and 8)? I'm just curious to understand the thought process involved. 7) I have always done all the above since I passed my driving test in april 1970.
8) This positive driving procedure was learnt from my late father.
9) I am not an automatum. Each indication is a conscious move in line with traffic and conditions at the time.
10) Er....that's it.
Incidentally, I have never suggested that you were an automaton; and your confirmation that you are not should be sufficient to dispel any doubts that others may have had. So, that being the case, I'd be grateful if you could explain the conscious thought process that is involved in deciding to indicate... "in line with traffic conditions at the time", if the traffic conditions are such that there are no other road users within half a mile or more when changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway.
Many thanks.
WD39
By always indicating,could give the impression that, and you have not mentioned it, that you have not checked the surrounding area, to see if anyone will benefit from your indication.
I suspect you may wll be one of those drivers who enter a slip road and indicate right to join the main carriageway, fully expecting that the main traffic will cede to you, when in fact it should be the other way round.
Signalling is to give an intention, so if by coming down a slip road onto a Mway or DC a signal is nor really required as by being on the slip road your only intention is to join the Mway or DC, there can be no other answer otherwise you would not be on it.
By always indicating,could give the impression that, and you have not mentioned it, that you have not checked the surrounding area, to see if anyone will benefit from your indication.
I suspect you may wll be one of those drivers who enter a slip road and indicate right to join the main carriageway, fully expecting that the main traffic will cede to you, when in fact it should be the other way round.
Signalling is to give an intention, so if by coming down a slip road onto a Mway or DC a signal is nor really required as by being on the slip road your only intention is to join the Mway or DC, there can be no other answer otherwise you would not be on it.
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
...I'd be grateful if you could explain the conscious thought process that is involved in deciding to indicate... if the traffic conditions are such that there are no other road users within half a mile or more when changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway.
Many thanks.
Personally mine is indicate anytime I'm significantly changing direction after considering whether the signal will mislead or not. That offers me a lower cognitive load than also pondering whether anyone else might benefit from it...Many thanks.
What I'm trying to find out is what are the deeper mental processes involved in the adoption of the principle to... "indicate anytime I'm significantly changing direction after considering whether the signal will mislead or not"? For example, let's take of my scenario of changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway (I'm presuming that's a "significant" change in your view), in a situation where there is no other road user within half a mile or more. Do you, when applying your principle, check 100% around your vehicle, conclude that there is no other road user present who would be misled by a signal and then include a signal in your driving plan based on that criteria alone? If the answer is yes, which I'm assuming will be your answer, based upon your earlier comment, how do you deal mentally with that niggling little thought at the back of your mind which is saying... "why did I signal, there was nobody there, it wasn't necessary?" Does that thought ever occur? And, if it does, do you simply dismiss it as irrelevant, or do you ever think to yourself... "yes, it wasn't necessary, but it didn't mislead anyone because there was no one there to be misled"?
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
...I'd be grateful if you could explain the conscious thought process that is involved in deciding to indicate... if the traffic conditions are such that there are no other road users within half a mile or more when changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway.
Many thanks.
Personally mine is indicate anytime I'm significantly changing direction after considering whether the signal will mislead or not. That offers me a lower cognitive load than also pondering whether anyone else might benefit from it...Many thanks.
What I'm trying to find out is what are the deeper mental processes involved in the adoption of the principle to... "indicate anytime I'm significantly changing direction after considering whether the signal will mislead or not"? For example, let's take of my scenario of changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway (I'm presuming that's a "significant" change in your view), in a situation where there is no other road user within half a mile or more. Do you, when applying your principle, check 100% around your vehicle, conclude that there is no other road user present who would be misled by a signal and then include a signal in your driving plan based on that criteria alone? If the answer is yes, which I'm assuming will be your answer, based upon your earlier comment, how do you deal mentally with that niggling little thought at the back of your mind which is saying... "why did I signal, there was nobody there, it wasn't necessary?" Does that thought ever occur? And, if it does, do you simply dismiss it as irrelevant, or do you ever think to yourself... "yes, it wasn't necessary, but it didn't mislead anyone because there was no one there to be misled"?
It's a system (just like what your advocating) only it has less to consider, therefore a lower cognitive load & because it's based on the premise of signalling rather than not is (from my experience of thousands of advanced drivers attempting to deploy the system you are advocating) less likely to result in a signal not being given when it was required (a greater sin IMHO than signalling when nobody is around).
It's merely an alternative system to increase the positive outcome rate when encountering others.
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
... let's think of my scenario of changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway (I'm presuming that's a "significant" change in your view), in a situation where there is no other road user within half a mile or more. Do you, when applying your principle, check 100% around your vehicle, conclude that there is no other road user present who would be misled by a signal and then include a signal in your driving plan based on that criteria alone? If the answer is yes, which I'm assuming will be your answer, based upon your earlier comment, how do you deal mentally with that niggling little thought at the back of your mind which is saying... "why did I signal, there was nobody there, it wasn't necessary?" Does that thought ever occur? And, if it does, do you simply dismiss it as irrelevant, or do you ever think to yourself... "yes, it wasn't necessary, but it didn't mislead anyone because there was no one there to be misled"?
By adopting a mental process that you check what is around & signal unless it will mislead.It's a system (just like what your advocating) only it has less to consider, therefore a lower cognitive load & because it's based on the premise of signalling rather than not is (from my experience of thousands of advanced drivers attempting to deploy the system you are advocating) less likely to result in a signal not being given when it was required (a greater sin IMHO than signalling when nobody is around).
It's merely an alternative system to increase the positive outcome rate when encountering others.
Are you willing to answer that question or am I to remain for ever disappointed in not knowing the answer?
johnao said:
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
... let's think of my scenario of changing lanes on a dual carriageway or motorway (I'm presuming that's a "significant" change in your view), in a situation where there is no other road user within half a mile or more. Do you, when applying your principle, check 100% around your vehicle, conclude that there is no other road user present who would be misled by a signal and then include a signal in your driving plan based on that criteria alone? If the answer is yes, which I'm assuming will be your answer, based upon your earlier comment, how do you deal mentally with that niggling little thought at the back of your mind which is saying... "why did I signal, there was nobody there, it wasn't necessary?" Does that thought ever occur? And, if it does, do you simply dismiss it as irrelevant, or do you ever think to yourself... "yes, it wasn't necessary, but it didn't mislead anyone because there was no one there to be misled"?
By adopting a mental process that you check what is around & signal unless it will mislead.It's a system (just like what your advocating) only it has less to consider, therefore a lower cognitive load & because it's based on the premise of signalling rather than not is (from my experience of thousands of advanced drivers attempting to deploy the system you are advocating) less likely to result in a signal not being given when it was required (a greater sin IMHO than signalling when nobody is around).
It's merely an alternative system to increase the positive outcome rate when encountering others.
Are you willing to answer that question or am I to remain for ever disappointed in not knowing the answer?
I advocate maximising outcomes though, that's why I'll quite happily signal when nobody is around to maximise the outcome on the occasions they are.
I'm personally more likely to make an error resulting in conflict or confusing through trying not to signal, than signalling & merely concentrating on the timing of the signal, so I favour that approach.
If people can evidence harm I'm causing with approaches I take, then I'll review & change to eliminate that. That's what has led me to the change in philosophy from the system you are advocating to the one I'm talking about.
So to answer you question, in normal conditions (if I'm not doing the unique strange stuff) I'd quite happily signal in the situation given & not worry about that system deployment, because keeping to that system will enhance the possibility of me not making an error to confuse or conflict later in the drive by maintaining that system.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 29th October 06:52
vonhosen said:
... So to answer you question, in normal conditions ... I'd quite happily signal in the situation given & not worry about that system deployment, because keeping to that system will enhance the possibility of me not making an error to confuse or conflict later in the drive by maintaining that system.
Thank you for your explanation, which is most interesting and much appreciated.The main advantage of the 'only signal if useful' system is that it imposes a cognitive load. In the context of multilane lane changing, I hope it may result in reduction of inconsiderate lane changing.
VH, can you give a couple of examples of situations where there would be a lower cognitive load from the 'always signal unless it would mislead' system, but where there is no chance of adversely affecting another road user?
However, the choice between these two systems which both involve selective signalling is secondary to the debate. My concern is that a high proportion of the always signal fraternity think that if they signal it is fine to manoeuvre without consideration.
VH, can you give a couple of examples of situations where there would be a lower cognitive load from the 'always signal unless it would mislead' system, but where there is no chance of adversely affecting another road user?
However, the choice between these two systems which both involve selective signalling is secondary to the debate. My concern is that a high proportion of the always signal fraternity think that if they signal it is fine to manoeuvre without consideration.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff