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

[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.

[Technomad]

hman said:

wheres the latest reply from the OP? - I think he's gone away to lick his wounds

Not at all, just couldn't be bothered with some of the gratuitous bloody idiocy on the thread. The guilty party in this case simply wasn't looking behind him at all and was assuming that - had I taken the slingshot approach, I'd have been fully committed and right alongside him - at full chat in a 911 - at the point where he was going to pull out anyway (remember that the w/a lens on the dashcam makes distances appear greater). So my three-step approach - close to overtake point, pull out - decision point - then go, both gives me multiple points at which I can abort the overtake and for him (were he looking) to see, beyond doubt, what my intention is. A slingshot overtake is, 95% of the time, a sign of poor planning and over-commitment. If you doubt that,then take pretty much any advanced driving course, then come back and see if your viewpoint has changed. FWIW, I'm an IAM Observer, RoSPA Gold, going through HPC and a not inexperienced road and track driver in a wide range of briskish bikes and cars. That doesn't mean that I can't (or don't) make mistakes. What it does mean is, that when I or someone else cocks it up, there's a better chance of failing safe. Which, surely, is what it's all about? Sayonora…

[Technomad]

jbsportstech said:

Maybe its working on highways but I am only person to consider the clues put on by local highways.

Deviation markers and slow in the carriageway, these are not expensive decorations. A RSA audit would of deemed these necessary and our rsa audits are carried out by ex traffic police officers.

Whilst these are not a block on overtaking my view and experience has been should the op get it wrong the driving would at the least be considered without due and and or dangerous as these are warnings that have not been heeded, you need to be very clear in your mind its safe. I think the number of cars and ops far back contact position was not safest.

Catching a couple here - your point about a "far back" contact position - that's an illusion - a forward mounted wide-angle lens exaggerates distance, so I'd in fact moved up to a perfectly normal contact position from a fairly relaxed follow. I'd also been behind the red car for several miles without him previously having shown any interest in an overtake, where there were plenty of opportunities. In fact, I chose that point for the overtake as it was a) safe and b) approaching a left-hander (with full sightline) so it's where most people wouldn't choose to overtake, thereby hopefully lessening the chance of him doing exactly what he in fact did. I would (and have) carried out similar manoeuvres with police examiners alongside and been congratulated on forward planning. Had I not had to abandon the overtake, I'd have been pulling back in just after the turn-in for the bend (ie not decreasing my turn radius pre-turn-in) and at a speed entirely consistent with car and conditions.

[Technomad]

StressedDave said:

It does sort of beg the question why, given that you'd followed for several miles and leaving several overtakes (presumably), why you were waiting for this particular opportunity... Nothing wrong with this particular opportunity, but knowing the road there's far better ones preceeding.

There'd been quite a lot of Northbound traffic and, on the couple of occasions when well-sighted opportunities did present (on the long climb up towards the car parks), I'd held off, assuming the red car was going to go. He didn't, so on this final occasion, when it was a much less obvious overtake, I assumed that he probably wouldn't be going. But planned in case he did, which was just as well.

[Technomad]

MC Bodge said:

The lesson to learn is probably don't broadcast dashcam footage if you don't want to be criticised, whether justified or not, no matter how many qualifications you have....

Criticism is just fine, if it's informed and thoughtful. Gratuitous trolling and unthinking testiculation is, I grant you, more typical of most online fora, so I just ignore those and respond to the people who've got something useful to say. And if qualifications ever make you, me or anyone else think we've nothing left to learn, then that's the biggest possible fail - the trick is knowing who to listen to: easier done IRL than online, definitely.