Irrational Driving behaviours

[911hope]

I've often been puzzled why people make certain decisions when driving. Often they create risk for no advantage.

My favourite is....

Swerving around a puddle, when there is oncoming traffic.....Surely a splash is preferable to a head-on crash.

Any other examples that people have observed.

[911hope]

Scrump said:

Shallow puddle or water filled pothole?

Doesn't matter if the alternative is a crash.

[911hope]

georgeyboy12345 said:

I wouldn’t call that irrational. My driving instructor taught me to treat a large puddle as an obstacle where safe to do so and go around it.

And if there were an oncoming car? Would that be rational?

[911hope]

Joey Deacon said:

Exactly this, the problem is you cannot see what is under the water. It could be a shallow puddle, on the other hand it could be hiding a massive pot hole that is about to buckle your rim and ruin your day.

I don't think it is that irrational to be honest.

So you would prefer the head-on crash?

[911hope]

stupidbutkeen said:

But what if the alternative was to avoid the puddle and not crash, Which happens quite a lot i hear.

Have a read of the original post, there is the part about the oncoming car...

[911hope]

oceanview said:

I've noticed a few drivers when approaching a cyclist on a road, moving out a good 2/3 metres to go around them- all good but, they decide to do it when they have traffic approaching them from the other direction!

I have seen a few near misses through this idiotic manoeuvre.

I have seen this on many occasions, the next move is normally to pull back in and "squeeze" the cyclist.
Sometimes the oncoming car stops dead to save the day.

[911hope]

Zarco said:

Blindly following another driver overtaking a cyclist is my favourite.

That applies to perhaps 99.99% of drivers in my experience cycling.
The subsequent cars get closer and closer to the cyclist, also.

[911hope]

Joey Deacon said:

911hope said:

Scrump said:

Shallow puddle or water filled pothole?

Doesn't matter if the alternative is a crash.

I actually had this same dilemma a few months ago in Devon. Driving along a straight piece of road I suddenly noticed that the storm drain cover up ahead had completely collapsed. I had to make a split second decision, but there was a car coming the other way so I had no choice but to drive over it.

Leading to a massive bang, the unmistakable sound of a tyre deflating and a very bent rim.

Sounds like you made the correct decision.

[911hope]

Lorries overtaking each others on motorways (because of their miniscule and possibly temporary speed advantage). They block multiple lanes and represent a major risk when they pull out into the path of a faster vehicle.

For what? Somewhere between 0% to 1% reduction in journey time.

[911hope]

sean ie3 said:

Teams of cyclist's grouped in such a manner that I can't give them the prescribed 1metre when I pass. I know who it is that will be at fault if something happens, is it rational to make them aware someone else is using the road and ruin their conversation or just wait until a safe pass can be made? Anyway it is Sunday morning so no need to hurry.

You mean minimum of 1.5m, surely.

[911hope]

Dingu said:

How many of the incidents you observed resulted in a head on crash?

To answer your question, I have seen one such incident result in a crash.

And I have been the oncoming car on several occasions, where I needed to overt the crash.

I guess it is people like me keeping the irrational alive.

[911hope]

Speeding up to prevent an overtake.

[911hope]

Driving down the middle of a wide road, simply because there isn't a white line.

[911hope]

7mike said:

Why would there not be a centre line on a wide road?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...


2.2.6.??On rural roads below 5.5 m in width, over?running of the carriageway edge can occur if
centre line markings are provided, causing maintenance problems. Drivers might also expect
a road marked with a centre line to be wide enough for opposing lanes of traffic to pass. In
these circumstances the centre line should be omitted, but it is recommended that edge of
carriageway markings would be helpful.

For example...Lots of residential roads, roads that have been recently resurfaced.

Point is lots of people don't seem to be able to work out where the centre is, unless there is a line instructing them.

Or is there another explanation?

[911hope]

georgeyboy12345 said:

Can you read?

Very well thankyou.

[911hope]

Tyre Smoke said:

The expectation of slip road drivers is incredibly annoying. And the number that flick you the finger when you fail to yield to them is increasing.

I don't understand why they think you should give way to them. Has driving instruction changed that existing DC/motorway traffic should deviate to accommodate?

There should be no expectation of deviating to accommodate, but if L2 is clear and the joining car seems closing on your path, or there a lot of joining cars it is advised that you move over.

Someone increasing their risk by not doing so is achieving what?

[911hope]

Tyre Smoke said:

It's courtesy, yes. But the expectation is it should be done. Whether L2 is empty or has traffic approaching.

Agree entirely.

However, I never discount the stupidity motive for joining badly.
Many don't even look at the traffic until the are at the joining point, so they didn't plan at all.

I look at everyone joining and try to predict what will happen, so I won't be there when they join.
If I can't change lane, there is the option of speed change to avoid the accident. Relying on them seeing me or finally "backing off" is not in my control.

Edited by 911hope on Friday 5th August 10:13

[911hope]

What The Deuces said:

911hope said:

Agree entirely.

However, I never discount the stupidity motive for joining badly.
Many don't even look at the traffic until the are at the joining point, so they didn't plan at all.

I look at everyone joining and try to predict what will happen, so I won't be there when they join.
If I can't change lane, there is the option of speed change to avoid the accident. Relying on them seeing me or finally "backing off" is not in my control.

Edited by 911hope on Friday 5th August 10:13

Then if you both back off at the same time.....

Theres a reason why its the slip that has to give way.....

There are 2 choices :

1. Avoid the accident.
2. Be stubborn and risk the accident, happy in the knowledge that it would the other guy's fault.

I choose option 1.

A suspect that would be the "advanced drivers'" recommendation.

[911hope]

What The Deuces said:

911hope said:

There are 2 choices :

1. Avoid the accident.
2. Be stubborn and risk the accident, happy in the knowledge that it would the other guy's fault.

I choose option 1.

A suspect that would be the "advanced drivers'" recommendation.

i'm not remotely saying i'd hold firm and have an accident, far from it. I asked you a question

I said what happens if you both hesitate and back off....? You can try and avoid the accident and still have an accident/situation. I see it lots

The reason the slip has to give way is that its simple and predictable for all those involved.

Personally if i'm in lane one i'm looking for the weapon on the slip road as soon as i can see them, i'll then make sure i'm nowhere near him by either changing lanes or speeding up/slowing slightly before they even know i exist.

Excellent, you also choose option 1.

[911hope]

FatboyKim said:

Hopefully I can explain this clearly, but drivers who swerve into the oncoming lane to avoid slowing down too much when the car they are following slows down to turn left into a side road.

The act of doing so is just dangerous and saves seconds no time whatsoever.

Another is people not indicating on roundabouts, or lazily leaving their right indicator on even when leaving the roundabout. I can't really condone it but my dad without fail very slowly pulls out on any vehicle if it's obvious that they are coming round the roundabout without indicating, therefore massively inconveniencing them and bringing them to a stop whilst he looks at them and shrugs his shoulders. And without fail every time, the non-indicating driver launches into an angry tirade of swearing and hand signals, despite the incident ultimately being caused by their lack of indicating to signal that they are coming right around the roundabout.

General driving standards have just become horrific in the last 5 or so years.

Edited by FatboyKim on Friday 5th August 11:05

I'm glad you don't condone your Dad's behaviour. It fits right in the irrational behaviour category.

If I understand, he drives to block someone, because they didn't indicate.
Does he think he is changing the world?
Is he happy to take the blame, in the event of the accident he caused?

Reacting to bad driving with worse driving!

Edited by 911hope on Friday 5th August 11:22