Saved by the System…

[Technomad]

Coming through Glencoe last Sunday, I was sat for several miles behind a red Seat, itself in turn behind two other cars. When a sightline opened up, I could have just put my foot down and done a classic slingshot manoeuvre on all three. What I actually did was follow Roadcraft - move from follow to contact position, indicate, pull out, check my sightline again, give a polite toot to let the three ahead know I was intending an overtake (was already on dip beam), waited a moment and then started to accelerate. That was the exact moment at which the berk in the Seat decided to dive out for an overtake, without paying any attention whatsoever to what was behind him - and I can only assume that he had the stereo on too loudly to hear my horn: had I gone for the slingshot option, I'd have simply collected him in my side. As it was, all I had to do was lift off for a moment to clear him. Of course, in another half second I would have been alongside him, but hopefully at the point where I was visible in whatever he had that passed for peripheral vision.

It does beg the question of just what you have to do to make people use their mirrors or, if they are using them, to stop behaving like complete psychos.
There are elements of roadcraft that are questionable if applied too prescriptively, but there are very few times when I wouldn't use this approach.

http://youtu.be/mTGEUHu6bLI

[SVS]

I've also been saved from having a serious accident on a couple of occasions, directly as a result of stuff I learnt in advanced training.

On one occasion, advanced stuff saved me from what would have been a very serious accident on the bike (likely life changing injury or fatal).

I think that's why so many of us are keen advocates of advanced training. It can be life saving.

[hman]

From the video.

A) he was a long way away from you before he pulled out, yes it was a lack of observation on his part but in no way would you have not avoided the accident if it was 0.5 of a second later

B) why did you choose the entry to a fairly tight left hander ( as indicated by the chevrons signs at the side of the road) to begin your manuever when there was a perfectly decent straight road with good clear visibility immediately after then bend??

C) why have you chosen to post up such a crap video of the SEAT driving along with the reg no. it is only serving to call into question your judgement in addition to the SEAT, and it looks to me as if the SEAT showed you a clean set of heels and you are annoyed that he did so.

D) I have a dashcam, but whilst it records untold amounts of tttery I am yet to make a youtube video of said tttery - with the exception of a 207 which overtook me on the A1, and then aquaplaned and spun off into the barrier - all on film, much better use of the camera I think!

[mybrainhurts]

Technomad said:

had I gone for the slingshot option, I'd have simply collected him in my side.

Not necessarily. I've observed this frequently with two cars ahead in similar circumstances with no contact after evasive action by the miscreant.

Technomad said:

It does beg the question of just what you have to do to make people use their mirrors or, if they are using them, to stop behaving like complete psychos.

Alternatively, he was very skilled, observed your hesitation and took advantage of it.

Nothing in life is certain...

[7mike]

I reckon he saw you pull out, decided that if you were going to go, so was he. Just like the ones who follow like sheep; they need someone else to do the thinking for them. No harm done & a good example of why the technique you adopted was a good idea.

[Technomad]

hman said:

From the video.

A) he was a long way away from you before he pulled out, yes it was a lack of observation on his part but in no way would you have not avoided the accident if it was 0.5 of a second later

B) why did you choose the entry to a fairly tight left hander ( as indicated by the chevrons signs at the side of the road) to begin your manuever when there was a perfectly decent straight road with good clear visibility immediately after then bend??

C) why have you chosen to post up such a crap video of the SEAT driving along with the reg no. it is only serving to call into question your judgement in addition to the SEAT, and it looks to me as if the SEAT showed you a clean set of heels and you are annoyed that he did so.

D) I have a dashcam, but whilst it records untold amounts of tttery I am yet to make a youtube video of said tttery - with the exception of a 207 which overtook me on the A1, and then aquaplaned and spun off into the barrier - all on film, much better use of the camera I think!

At the risk of feeding the troll:
a) the wide angle and positioning of a dashcam massively exaggerates the distance between vehicles. Half a second is conservative - quarter of a second is more likely.
b) if you think that diving out in front of someone like that is acceptable behaviour on the public road, then I'd much rather you were driving a long, long way from me, preferably in another continent.
c) I posted because of exactly what I said: a clear and specific example, not just of his dangerous and stupid driving (which itself wouldn't have been worthy of a post) but of how application of a very specific 'advanced' driving technique saved the situation. We also have far, far too many people dying or being seriously injured in this part of the world, by exactly the sort of tttery we see here, so I'm all in favour of a bit of naming and shaming where there's objective evidence.

[waremark]

I thought he probably knew you were coming and rightly judged that he had room to go before you. I thought he was in a close follow position which suggested he was looking for the overtake whereas you were much further back. I recommend a long application of main beam before a multiple overtake.

Any multiple overtake requires extreme caution.

Glad it turned out fine.

[hman]

Technomad said:

hman said:

From the video.

A) he was a long way away from you before he pulled out, yes it was a lack of observation on his part but in no way would you have not avoided the accident if it was 0.5 of a second later

B) why did you choose the entry to a fairly tight left hander ( as indicated by the chevrons signs at the side of the road) to begin your manuever when there was a perfectly decent straight road with good clear visibility immediately after then bend??

C) why have you chosen to post up such a crap video of the SEAT driving along with the reg no. it is only serving to call into question your judgement in addition to the SEAT, and it looks to me as if the SEAT showed you a clean set of heels and you are annoyed that he did so.

D) I have a dashcam, but whilst it records untold amounts of tttery I am yet to make a youtube video of said tttery - with the exception of a 207 which overtook me on the A1, and then aquaplaned and spun off into the barrier - all on film, much better use of the camera I think!

At the risk of feeding the troll:
a) the wide angle and positioning of a dashcam massively exaggerates the distance between vehicles. Half a second is conservative - quarter of a second is more likely.
b) if you think that diving out in front of someone like that is acceptable behaviour on the public road, then I'd much rather you were driving a long, long way from me, preferably in another continent.
c) I posted because of exactly what I said: a clear and specific example, not just of his dangerous and stupid driving (which itself wouldn't have been worthy of a post) but of how application of a very specific 'advanced' driving technique saved the situation. We also have far, far too many people dying or being seriously injured in this part of the world, by exactly the sort of tttery we see here, so I'm all in favour of a bit of naming and shaming where there's objective evidence.

Troll, oh the irony, read back your reply then think about how you are reacting.

As others have said, it wasnt dangerous by all accounts, he probably did see you, and he
took the oppurtunity to get on with an overtake that he too had been waiting for a long time to get on with.

I am still interested to know why you thought the up coming bend was the right place to start the overtake, particularly when there was a long straight road around the corner. Can you answer this please.

IMO you have read a book, used the principles to good use and are now making a complaint about an occurrance that most seasoned drivers would dismiss as a total non-event.

"Holier than thou" is strong in you.

This is what dashcams are best at recording - actual events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVLWVPd80OQ

[andym1603]

Watching the video several times I agree that the overtake risky, unless you could see through the left hand bend. Instead of using the horn as a warning could a headlight flash not have been used as a better warning?

[mybrainhurts]

hman said:

This is what dashcams are best at recording - actual events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVLWVPd80OQ

You do know stopping on the hard shoulder gets you 3 points, don't you?

[johnao]

Technomad said:

At the risk of feeding the troll:

Please trust me, I'm not a troll. What follows is how I would be analysing my driving after reviewing the video had I been driving your car.

At 2 seconds: The red Seat starts to move towards the centre line. My position on the road almost exactly matches that of the Seat at this stage in that I haven’t yet placed my offside wheels over the centre line. The movement of the Seat towards the centre line should have been setting alarm bells ringing in my head, even at this early stage in the proceedings. And, this is before I've even begun my move to the offside of the road with my car.

At 3 seconds: I moved offside much quicker than the Seat whose offside wheels were now on the centre line. Why did I miss the lateral movement and body language of the Seat? Was it because I was focused on the distance, looking for oncoming cars, and missed what was happening right in front of me? Was I too focused on thinking about executing the perfect triangle overtake; positioning exactly as the text book says I should? Why did I miss the movement of the Seat towards the centre line? That’s what I’ve got to keep asking myself and understand how that happened.

At 4 seconds: It's now clear that it's the Seat driver's intention to overtake the vehicle(s) in front of him. I should have eased off the accelerator and held my station.

At 4.5 seconds: Yes, at this point I had confirmation that the Seat was going for an overtake.

At 5 seconds: I note that I flashed the driver of the Seat, presumably as a rebuke. If I’d read the situation correctly I would have let him through without drama and not felt the urge to flash him.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's how I would have analysed my driving having reviewed the video.

On a more personal note, you appear to accelerate whilst moving offside. My take on this is that if you hadn't accelerated whilst moving offside, just held back and focussed momentarily on the body language of the Seat, you would have been alerted to his intention to overtake as he moved towards the centre line.

The mistake that the driver of the Seat made was that he didn't signal to you his intention to overtake. And, because you hadn’t picked up on the Seat’s lateral movement towards the centre line, this annoyed you. But, the lesson to take away from this incident is that whilst other drivers make mistakes, of course they do, all the time, that doesn't mean that we can't learn from a situation like this and do better ourselves next time.

Yes, he was a bit of an idiot in not signalling, but there were other signs available for you to pick up on.

Edited by johnao on Thursday 6th March 16:44

Edited by johnao on Thursday 6th March 16:46

[waremark]

Well observed johnao.

So it turns out that your overtake was something like what you call a slingshot - accelerating from approximately a 2 second following position rather than from closer and from offside, and having given a light warning which had a reasonable chance of being observed.

It can be pretty painful putting up a video of one's driving. That is one of the reasons I have never done it! Are you now able to see it from the other driver's perspective?

For what it is worth, I have no problems with overtaking before or through the left bend providing you have seen the road far enough ahead - which I guess you had.

[waremark]

Technomad said:

What I actually did was follow Roadcraft - move from follow to contact position, indicate, pull out, check my sightline again, give a polite toot to let the three ahead know I was intending an overtake (was already on dip beam), waited a moment and then started to accelerate.

Looking at your own video again carefully, do you still think that is what you did? Or did you accelerate from a following position? When do you think you gave your toot? When do you think you waited a moment? What was the purpose your later flash?

[jamesallport]

I've only watched the video without sound but there was a clear drift towards the centre line by the target, and it definitely looks to me as though you moved out with power applied.

[JM]

andym1603 said:

Watching the video several times I agree that the overtake risky, unless you could see through the left hand bend.

You can see through the bend and onto the straight.

[nct001]

Overtaking on a bend, more than one car overtake and in the rain... racing the car in front all sounds like driving without due care and attention.

Why would you overtake a car at speed on a bend in the rain? Surely these cars would not be expecting this manoeuvre and might not position themselves with enough room for you etc

[Dave Hedgehog]

nct001 said:

Overtaking on a bend, more than one car overtake and in the rain... racing the car in front all sounds like driving without due care and attention.

Why would you overtake a car at speed on a bend in the rain? Surely these cars would not be expecting this manoeuvre and might not position themselves with enough room for you etc

especially with the amount of signage and warnings

[Dr Jekyll]

nct001 said:

Overtaking on a bend, more than one car overtake and in the rain... racing the car in front all sounds like driving without due care and attention.

Why would you overtake a car at speed on a bend in the rain? Surely these cars would not be expecting this manoeuvre and might not position themselves with enough room for you etc

There is nothing inherently wrong with overtaking on a bend, or overtaking more than one car, or with overtaking in the rain.

[johnao]

Dr Jekyll said:

nct001 said:

Overtaking on a bend, more than one car overtake and in the rain... racing the car in front all sounds like driving without due care and attention.

Why would you overtake a car at speed on a bend in the rain? Surely these cars would not be expecting this manoeuvre and might not position themselves with enough room for you etc

There is nothing inherently wrong with overtaking on a bend, or overtaking more than one car, or with overtaking in the rain.

Agreed, there appeared to be nothing wrong with the decision to overtake. Apart from the initial hiccup in not discerning the intentions of the red Seat and the personal annoyance and irritation that then ensued, it looks as though it was a well executed overtake.

[waremark]

Technomad, I really am sorry about the way this has turned out for you. However, I am interested to know whether you are still seeing the situation in the same way you did originally, or whether you now understand why a number of us think you may have misinterpreted things?