Tell me like it is!

[JumboBeef]

TooMany2cvs said:

JumboBeef said:

Can I just remind folks that I was doing 70, the speed limit for the road, and so was everyone else (apart from the crane, van and car).

That's nice, dear.

Still, I think we're getting an insight into the mindset that caused the situation...

mmmm. So, are we all to drop to 30mph on a motorway/DC whenever we see a slow moving vehicle in a lane to the left of us? I'm not sure what your point it.....?

[JumboBeef]

PS: 70 is normally completely safe for this road. It has been drive a lot quicker than that too, completely safely. The point here is if staying at 70, dropping "a bit" or braking to match the crane's speed was the safest option.

[TooMany2cvs]

JumboBeef said:

TooMany2cvs said:

JumboBeef said:

Can I just remind folks that I was doing 70, the speed limit for the road, and so was everyone else (apart from the crane, van and car).

That's nice, dear.

Still, I think we're getting an insight into the mindset that caused the situation...

mmmm. So, are we all to drop to 30mph on a motorway/DC whenever we see a slow moving vehicle in a lane to the left of us? I'm not sure what your point it.....?

My point is that when there's a bloody great big mobile crane covered in flashing lights in L1, immediately after a junction that there's a car joining at, there's a fairly high chance that car will head for L2. Oh, look, what a surprise. He did. And that an alert driver might think this possibility could actually trump "But 70mph is legal..."

[JumboBeef]

Can I ask those who have said I should have slowed, to what speed?

Surely, if I was still going faster than the crane, van and car then I still could not have let them out safely without heavy braking.

I'll admit, some of these comments are confusing me!

[JumboBeef]

TooMany2cvs said:

And that an alert driver might think this possibility could actually trump "But 70mph is legal..."

I see your point. But I (as others do) know that the safest top speed on a straight bit of road could be anything from 10mph to 110mph depending on hazards.

The crane was a hazard. It was well lit. My biggest question is would others here who have said slow down, would they have eased off all the way down to 30mph (ish) to safely let that car out?

[JumboBeef]

TooMany2cvs said:

And that an alert driver might think this possibility could actually trump

To be fair, I did. And so I braked and missed him.

(Yes I flashed the bugger, so hang me).

[RobM77]

JumboBeef said:

PS: 70 is normally completely safe for this road. It has been drive a lot quicker than that too, completely safely. The point here is if staying at 70, dropping "a bit" or braking to match the crane's speed was the safest option.

I've just watched this again and I think the main point worth making is that the 1 series stays indicating throughout and actually crosses the lane markings 27 seconds into the clip, whereas it doesn't appear that you start braking properly until about 29.5/30 seconds. Even if we ignore his indication, that's a huge reaction time to the 1 series changing lanes and that has a number of explanations:

a) The video isn't putting across your speed and braking accurately due to it being dark, the wide angle lens etc.

b) Your reaction times are very slow.

c) You were on cruise and it took that time to get your foot onto the brake.

d) You were trying to scare the guy and/or make a point.

I'm not going to be presumptuous by saying which of the above occurred, but those are the possibilities as far as I see it. We can logically remove some of the above though - you say that you were covering the brake, so that removes c) and it also removes most of the reasons behind b) too. We're then left with a and d. I think some posters are assuming d, thus their reaction above. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

[JumboBeef]

RobM77 said:

JumboBeef said:

PS: 70 is normally completely safe for this road. It has been drive a lot quicker than that too, completely safely. The point here is if staying at 70, dropping "a bit" or braking to match the crane's speed was the safest option.

I've just watched this again and I think the main point worth making is that the 1 series stays indicating throughout and actually crosses the lane markings 27 seconds into the clip, whereas it doesn't appear that you start braking properly until about 29.5/30 seconds. Even if we ignore his indication, that's a huge reaction time to the 1 series changing lanes and that has a number of explanations:

a) The video isn't putting across your speed and braking accurately due to it being dark, the wide angle lens etc.

b) Your reaction times are very slow.

c) You were on cruise and it took that time to get your foot onto the brake.

d) You were trying to scare the guy and/or make a point.

I'm not going to be presumptuous by saying which of the above occurred, but those are the possibilities as far as I see it. We can logically remove some of the above though - you say that you were covering the brake, so that removes c) and it also removes most of the reasons behind b) too. We're then left with a and d. I think some posters are assuming d, thus their reaction above. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Good post.

Can I add e) only slowing enough to avoid an accident and not putting my passenger through the windscreen....?

I did brake as soon as he moved out. My reactions are "good" (I'm not an F1 driver but I do have the experience of driving at speed because of my job).

I would say 90% for a), 9% for e and if I am totally honest, I'll chuck a 1% in there for d)

[RobM77]

JumboBeef said:

RobM77 said:

JumboBeef said:

PS: 70 is normally completely safe for this road. It has been drive a lot quicker than that too, completely safely. The point here is if staying at 70, dropping "a bit" or braking to match the crane's speed was the safest option.

I've just watched this again and I think the main point worth making is that the 1 series stays indicating throughout and actually crosses the lane markings 27 seconds into the clip, whereas it doesn't appear that you start braking properly until about 29.5/30 seconds. Even if we ignore his indication, that's a huge reaction time to the 1 series changing lanes and that has a number of explanations:

a) The video isn't putting across your speed and braking accurately due to it being dark, the wide angle lens etc.

b) Your reaction times are very slow.

c) You were on cruise and it took that time to get your foot onto the brake.

d) You were trying to scare the guy and/or make a point.

I'm not going to be presumptuous by saying which of the above occurred, but those are the possibilities as far as I see it. We can logically remove some of the above though - you say that you were covering the brake, so that removes c) and it also removes most of the reasons behind b) too. We're then left with a and d. I think some posters are assuming d, thus their reaction above. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Good post.

Can I add e) only slowing enough to avoid an accident and not putting my passenger through the windscreen....?

I did brake as soon as he moved out. My reactions are "good" (I'm not an F1 driver but I do have the experience of driving at speed because of my job).

I would say 90% for a), 9% for e and if I am totally honest, I'll chuck a 1% in there for d)

To be fair, it looks like you are trying to put your passenger through the windscreen, that was my point! The video makes it look like you're barely slowing at all and then suddenly you stamp on the brake big time at about 29/30 secs in. I'm not saying that's what happened, just that that's what the video makes it look like. The kindest thing to do to your passenger and the safest thing from a dynamics point of view would have been to slow linearly at the same rate from 27s when the 1 series pulls out.

I think the guys above are discussing backing off much earlier, when it's apparent the 1 series hasn't cancelled his indicator after joining the road, although to be fair there is a chance of getting into an "after you" loop if you drive like that - sometimes it's better to be positive.

[BertBert]

dvenman said:

JumboBeef said:

Indicators mean "I would like to come out" not "I'm coming out, ready or not"

That's what they should mean...the man on the Clapham Omnibus generally uses them as a "here I come"!

Interestingly back in the dark ages, my driving instructor was strongly of the view that indicators mean "this is what I am doing", not "this is what I'd like to do, please let me out".

I'm not sure that's so in all circs in a practical sense, but I like it as a guide. Decide when you are doing your thing and it's safe so to do, indicate, then do it.

Bert

[RobM77]

BertBert said:

dvenman said:

JumboBeef said:

Indicators mean "I would like to come out" not "I'm coming out, ready or not"

That's what they should mean...the man on the Clapham Omnibus generally uses them as a "here I come"!

Interestingly back in the dark ages, my driving instructor was strongly of the view that indicators mean "this is what I am doing", not "this is what I'd like to do, please let me out".

I'm not sure that's so in all circs in a practical sense, but I like it as a guide. Decide when you are doing your thing and it's safe so to do, indicate, then do it.

Bert

I think you meant to say "this is what I am going to do soon"? Whichever viewpoint you subscribe to (i.e. a) "this is what I would like to do soon" or b) "this is what I am going to do soon"), the indicator should always precede the manoeuvre by several flashes so everyone gets a chance to know what you're about to do. Indicating as one moves has become almost the norm now (as demonstrated beautifully by the vehicle passing the lorry early on in the OP's clip) and it's next to useless, as once someone starts moving you can see what they're doing!

[TooMany2cvs]

BertBert said:

Interestingly back in the dark ages, my driving instructor was strongly of the view that indicators mean "this is what I am doing", not "this is what I'd like to do, please let me out".

I'm not sure that's so in all circs in a practical sense, but I like it as a guide. Decide when you are doing your thing and it's safe so to do, indicate, then do it.

There's two different meanings...

YOUR indicators should be used to mean "This is what I'd like to do, please let me."
Every other idiot's indicators should be seen as a threat of "This is what I'm doing, whether you like it or not."
Then there's the idiots who don't use their indicators, of course.

[Tony1963]

I think the op would have been very foolish indeed to have done what he did, but on a motorcycle. Ok, not a totally relevant comment, but relying on 1.5 tons of steel and plastics isn't good defensive driving. And one day that car in front, the one with the 6ft 8in lumberjack whose girl has just dumped him might decide to retaliate. Just not worth it.

[waremark]

JumboBeef said:

TooMany2cvs said:

JumboBeef said:

Can I just remind folks that I was doing 70, the speed limit for the road, and so was everyone else (apart from the crane, van and car).

That's nice, dear.

Still, I think we're getting an insight into the mindset that caused the situation...

mmmm. So, are we all to drop to 30mph on a motorway/DC whenever we see a slow moving vehicle in a lane to the left of us? I'm not sure what your point it.....?

Didn't you say you would take any criticism like a man? I haven't counted, but I get the impression that the majority of people think it would have been better to have started to slow earlier. You could have been slowing any time from 20 secs, when you can see that the BMW will either be caught behind the crane or will pull out in front of you. I don't think many people would have slowed to 30 mph or would recommend doing so, but if you were already slowing a bit and had lost a bit of speed it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

Would you have driven any differently if you had not been using the cruise control, for example starting to ease off?

Do you find the fact that you were at the speed limit is relevant in any way?

[JumboBeef]

waremark said:

Didn't you say you would take any criticism like a man? I haven't counted, but I get the impression that the majority of people think it would have been better to have started to slow earlier. You could have been slowing any time from 20 secs, when you can see that the BMW will either be caught behind the crane or will pull out in front of you. I don't think many people would have slowed to 30 mph or would recommend doing so, but if you were already slowing a bit and had lost a bit of speed it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

Would you have driven any differently if you had not been using the cruise control, for example starting to ease off?

Do you find the fact that you were at the speed limit is relevant in any way?

I'm not convinced that slowing would have been the right thing to do because, as I keep saying, it would have made it more likely the car (and maybe the van) would have pulled out, thus making me brake down to 30-40ish. Or he might have been planning to nip out just as I passed, and if I slowed that might confuse things.

Again, I've been thinking about the cruise. One advantage of the cruise was I could maintain a steady speed and yet have my foot over the brake. I could have come off the cruise, but should I, if I was going to maintain a steady speed? (and then I couldn't cover the brake as I did....)

Travelling at the speed limit is relevant as people joining expect approaching cars to be at the speed limit (ish). It's not like I was bearing down on him at 120, or bumbling along at 30 driving Miss Daisy.

[waremark]

JumboBeef said:

waremark said:

Didn't you say you would take any criticism like a man? I haven't counted, but I get the impression that the majority of people think it would have been better to have started to slow earlier. You could have been slowing any time from 20 secs, when you can see that the BMW will either be caught behind the crane or will pull out in front of you. I don't think many people would have slowed to 30 mph or would recommend doing so, but if you were already slowing a bit and had lost a bit of speed it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

Would you have driven any differently if you had not been using the cruise control, for example starting to ease off?

Do you find the fact that you were at the speed limit is relevant in any way?

I'm not convinced that slowing would have been the right thing to do because, as I keep saying, it would have made it more likely the car (and maybe the van) would have pulled out, thus making me brake down to 30-40ish. Or he might have been planning to nip out just as I passed, and if I slowed that might confuse things.

Again, I've been thinking about the cruise. One advantage of the cruise was I could maintain a steady speed and yet have my foot over the brake. I could have come off the cruise, but should I, if I was going to maintain a steady speed? (and then I couldn't cover the brake as I did....)

Travelling at the speed limit is relevant as people joining expect approaching cars to be at the speed limit (ish). It's not like I was bearing down on him at 120, or bumbling along at 30 driving Miss Daisy.

Fair replies. I feel that I would have been slowing a bit a bit earlier, and that in consequence it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

[Vaux]

waremark said:

JumboBeef said:

waremark said:

Didn't you say you would take any criticism like a man? I haven't counted, but I get the impression that the majority of people think it would have been better to have started to slow earlier. You could have been slowing any time from 20 secs, when you can see that the BMW will either be caught behind the crane or will pull out in front of you. I don't think many people would have slowed to 30 mph or would recommend doing so, but if you were already slowing a bit and had lost a bit of speed it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

Would you have driven any differently if you had not been using the cruise control, for example starting to ease off?

Do you find the fact that you were at the speed limit is relevant in any way?

I'm not convinced that slowing would have been the right thing to do because, as I keep saying, it would have made it more likely the car (and maybe the van) would have pulled out, thus making me brake down to 30-40ish. Or he might have been planning to nip out just as I passed, and if I slowed that might confuse things.

Again, I've been thinking about the cruise. One advantage of the cruise was I could maintain a steady speed and yet have my foot over the brake. I could have come off the cruise, but should I, if I was going to maintain a steady speed? (and then I couldn't cover the brake as I did....)

Travelling at the speed limit is relevant as people joining expect approaching cars to be at the speed limit (ish). It's not like I was bearing down on him at 120, or bumbling along at 30 driving Miss Daisy.

Fair replies. I feel that I would have been slowing a bit a bit earlier, and that in consequence it would have been much less dramatic when the BMW pulled out.

Would you have considered a headlight flash of adequate duration approaching this situation?

[TooMany2cvs]

Vaux said:

Would you have considered a headlight flash of adequate duration approaching this situation?

I certainly wouldn't, unless I was intending it to explicitly "say" to one of both of them - "Yep, you come out in front of me, mate."

OTOH, that's quite likely what I _would_ have done in that situation.

[Lgfst]

I stopped using cruise control mainly for this reason. Unless it's an empty motorway. I use the speed limiter as it allows easing off when planning ahead.

The full beam burst to warn of a hazard, I find, can be misunderstood by 99% of motorists as I'm letting you out kind of signal. Especially on DC or MW.

Maybe a horn warning when the BMW joined but maybe it was too far away.

Personally I would have slowed down a bit with the expectation that most other motorists are morons.

[ORD]

Last sentence in the post above.

I would say about 90 % of drivers in the BMW's position would have come out to L2, indicator or no? Why end up anchoring on when you don't have to.

Cruise control. That's why. It encourages terrible driving.