Am i the only person who indicates?
Discussion
akirk said:
No - if you haven't observed anyone around you, then there should be no-one around you, so why are you signalling? To whom are you communicating if there is no-one there... If as you suggested above you do it in case there is someone there, but not observed, then the signalling is the least of your worries - you are just as likely to run them over - because you are making a manoeuvre without any idea that someone might be there - that is bad driving...
If you believe that by signalling you have now covered your back (as suggested above) then that is the worst of driving - I don't know that someone is there, I will run them over anyway, but because I signalled I am okay Jack - it is their fault!!! That is the driver on the motorway who signals and moves out because somehow signalling is the magic that moves everyone else out of the way!!!
No, those are two entirely different situations. The driver on the motorway that you're referring to is either not bothering to look properly or he's looked and is moving anyway. That is indeed bad driving. What I'm talking about is being in a situation where if there were other road users around then you would indicate, but in this case you haven't seen anyone - there appears to be nobody around. You're saying that in that situation you wouldn't indicate because you haven't seen anyone, and I'm saying that I would indicate anyway, just in case I'd made a mistake in my observation. Accidents happen when people make mistakes - you may think that you never make mistakes, but I can assure you that you do, because you're human.If you believe that by signalling you have now covered your back (as suggested above) then that is the worst of driving - I don't know that someone is there, I will run them over anyway, but because I signalled I am okay Jack - it is their fault!!! That is the driver on the motorway who signals and moves out because somehow signalling is the magic that moves everyone else out of the way!!!
Yes, of course, as you rightly say, there are lots of other scenarios where you could put this unseen person in danger - for example braking hard for a deer when there may be an unseen reclining bicycle tucked behind your bumper etc etc. However, none of us would even pull out of our driveways if we worried about that sort of thing - the best we can do is to drive carefully and observe as best we can. Indicating takes a tiny amount of effort, and could potentially rescue a wide range of situations and prevent an accident. The biker in your blind spot in lane 1 on the motorway may be an idiot, especially if you're both catching a slow lorry, but he doesn't deserve to be side swiped off his bike because you mistakenly believe that your observation is flawless.
RobM77 said:
The biker in your blind spot in lane 1 on the motorway may be an idiot, especially if you're both catching a slow lorry, but he doesn't deserve to be side swiped off his bike because you mistakenly believe that your observation is flawless.
Okay - we will have to disagree...I understand that humans are flawed, and no-one is perfect etc. but AD is about driving to the highest standard, and there are some base levels to it - one of which has to be that you know who is around you... As I posted above - how can a bike get into your blind spot unless they at some point ride through your field of observation? If that is the case - how can you as a driver not have seen them if your observation is at a good standard?
Equally, if you are concerned that someone might be in your blind spot then either you deal with that possibility, or you don't move - so if I am moving out on the motorway and I feel there is any possibility that my observation might have been lacking / that there was a moment of down time, then I will look over my shoulder as well as mirrors etc.
I remember from my IAM days 20 years ago, my observer making a comment that I have lived by since:
- you can control the scene ahead of you by not driving into it...
- you can't so easily control the scene behind you, which can drive into you...
so observation of what is behind is really important - at any point on a motorway, I would hope that an AD could tell you all the vehicles around them - there just should not be an opportunity for a motorcyclist to arrive in your blind spot without your noticing...
A common analogy for observation is fishing - where you imagine casting your sight out ahead of you and then reeling it back in to the local area around the car - out and in, out and in - to the sides, behind, constantly scanning - I measured it the other day, and topology allowing, I am observing a good 1.5 miles ahead of me, and a (lesser) distance behind - plus aware of what is to my left and right - and even fleeting glances across to the other carriageway... So, while I hear your logic, it is based on an assumption (of not knowing who is around) which I would consider to not be AD.
Edited by akirk on Friday 6th April 15:44
RobM77 said:
Indicating takes a tiny amount of effort, and could potentially rescue a wide range of situations and prevent an accident.
Now, most of what you post on this topic I respect, even if I don't agree with the balance of priorities. But I dislike the imputation in that sentence that a decision not to indicate has anything to do with the effort involved in moving the control!Rob, is there ever a situation when you feel entirely confident that there is no-one to benefit from a signal? For example, you are on a long straight road off which you are going to turn into the only junction off it. You can see that there are no entrances (different of course from not being able to see an entrance), and there is a good view into your junction - it is clear. There are no road users in sight. Would you still signal, in spite of that level of certainty that there was no-one who could benefit from your signal? If so, would you justify it on the basis that your confidence level still wasn't high enough? If not, the only differences between us are the level of certainty you need before deciding not to signal, and you not accepting my argument that for the majority of drivers including myself selective signalling is an aid to improved observation.
Edited by waremark on Friday 6th April 16:58
Vipers said:
At the end of the day, does it really matter if you indicate if there is no one there, answer NO.
Of course, that goes without saying; if there's nobody there there's no need to indicate. What's being discussed is whether we can all be certain there's nobody there all of the time, even when tired, it's perhaps dark etc etc. We're human and we make mistakes.Just to add something, I have to admit the other thing that worries me is the people on this thread and others in the past who say they don't indicate in certain situations where I think it's essential (joining a motorway, overtaking etc), purely because they haven't really thought things through properly. That's even worse that what's being discussed right now.
RobM77 said:
Vipers said:
At the end of the day, does it really matter if you indicate if there is no one there, answer NO.
Of course, that goes without saying; if there's nobody there there's no need to indicate. What's being discussed is whether we can all be certain there's nobody there all of the time, even when tired, it's perhaps dark etc etc. We're human and we make mistakes.Just to add something, I have to admit the other thing that worries me is the people on this thread and others in the past who say they don't indicate in certain situations where I think it's essential (joining a motorway, overtaking etc), purely because they haven't really thought things through properly. That's even worse that what's being discussed right now.
I have just driven Cotswolds to Dorset with no motorway but many an overtake along the way sometimes indicating, not always (road positioning can make it crystal clear) but at no point did I have any doubt that I knew exactly who was around me...
akirk said:
RobM77 said:
Vipers said:
At the end of the day, does it really matter if you indicate if there is no one there, answer NO.
Of course, that goes without saying; if there's nobody there there's no need to indicate. What's being discussed is whether we can all be certain there's nobody there all of the time, even when tired, it's perhaps dark etc etc. We're human and we make mistakes.Just to add something, I have to admit the other thing that worries me is the people on this thread and others in the past who say they don't indicate in certain situations where I think it's essential (joining a motorway, overtaking etc), purely because they haven't really thought things through properly. That's even worse that what's being discussed right now.
I have just driven Cotswolds to Dorset with no motorway but many an overtake along the way sometimes indicating, not always (road positioning can make it crystal clear) but at no point did I have any doubt that I knew exactly who was around me...
RobM77 said:
What about the person you’re overtaking? Shouldn’t they be informed of what you’re doing? See my post earlier in the thread where I listed loads of reasons that person may need to know what you’re doing.
of course, but you don't always need an indicator to tell them that...let us think of a scenario... you are on a dual carriageway in the right hand lane travelling faster than and approaching a car in front which is in the left lane - you will be overtaking them soon, do you indicate? If you do, why? Could indicating suggest that you are about to turn off to the right? Of course you don't, you simply drive past, they know you will overtake because you are a) going faster and b) you are in the right hand lane...
now, a new scenario... you are on a single carriageway, with wide and long open views, nothing approaching for at least a mile, and no turnings or gateways, or buildings - the white road markings indicate that overtaking is fine... you are approaching a car in front, or have been sitting behind it for some time, but you are quite a way back, what you do in this position doesn't really affect the car in front... you move right, parallel to where you were, to open up the view and prepare for an overtake, at this point, you haven't committed to an overtake, you are maintaining the same distance behind and are prepared to return to the left if necessary...
if you indicate, the car behind might assume you are actively overtaking and close up the gap, losing your safety net, indicating at this point doesn't bother the car in front as you are sufficiently behind them - so you don't indicate as it might give the wrong message, you are simply moving across to look...
you decide that it is clear to go - the car in front will know you are overtaking, as like the scenario above you are approaching faster, and you are already clearly in the right-hand lane, so indicating now could confuse as to whether there is a right-turning you are planning to take, your road positioning is very very obvious, so indicating which is a warning that you are about to do something is not needed, as you have already done it your next acction is the acceleration and passing, not the moving out... equally the car behind has already seen you move across and in accelerating you are now moving away from them and therefore they need no further communication...
the scenario on the single carriageway is in fact no real difference from the dual carriageway - with both, car positioning will do the communicating, not signalling... the key in this second scenario is that initial move right which is not an overtake, but preparation - where signalling could be wrong and cause issues... esp. from following traffic if you have to return to the left... and once there, signalling may add nothing, and could confuse...
if an overtake is taken in the banana shape beloved of so many where you roar up behind the car in front, and curve around them, then yes an indicator might be good, but it might not be as good an overtake... I am always pleased to see how many drivers spot you moving right in preparation, with no pressure on them, but they then move left, or sometimes even flick their indicator left to show that they have seen that you are going to overtake... clear communication from both, but not always with an indicator
What if that car turns right? What if they need to move out because of a wild animal or a deep puddle? What if there’s an unlit pedestrian in the road coming the other way on the right hand side who thinks he’ll be fine and is suddenly presented with a car coming head on at him? The difference from the dual carriageway situation is that you are moving out to fill a previously empty lane. Your actions fall firmly into the category I described above of people who should be indicating but haven’t thought it through enough.
RobM77 said:
What if that car turns right? What if they need to move out because of a wild animal or a deep puddle? What if there’s an unlit pedestrian in the road coming the other way on the right hand side who thinks he’ll be fine and is suddenly presented with a car coming head on at him? The difference from the dual carriageway situation is that you are moving out to fill a previously empty lane. Your actions fall firmly into the category I described above of people who should be indicating but haven’t thought it through enough.
sorry, this is getting a bit silly now 
you are imagining all sorts of things that are not going to happen, where I am giving you the example from real life...if they decide, or need to move out for a wild animal or puddle, then they will do so whether I indicate or not, it is irrelevant. So I check for puddles ahead of them before overtaking, and I continue to watch them as I pass, ready to respond if they do something strange... none of that has anything to do with indicating or not! How would their moving out be okay if I had indicated?
there was no pedestrian coming the otherway, unlit or otherwise, if there was I wouldn't be overtaking - so again, utterly irrelevant... How would that mythical pedestrian be any happier if I indicated before running them over?! Sorry, in the nicest of ways, that is tosh!
and as I said in great detail and with huge clarity
I have already moved out before committing, indicating comes before moving out, and at that stage in this example it could confuse, and adds nothing, so is better avoided...you appear to have a bee in your bonnet about this and won't accept the logic, that is fine, you carry on indicating without thought, whether or not it adds clarity or confusion... Ultimately, you are wrong to say that there are no occasions where not indicating might be the right choice - I have given several examples in this thread... Equally your assertation above that I haven't thought it through is way off the mark, I am a very deliberate driver and I think through when to indicate, and when not and there are times for both... on the other hand your suggestion that you should always indicate just in case is a clear sign of no intelligent thought being used at all! So maybe a little bit of reflection on what you are actually saying? Normally what you post is very good, but this thread is showing a very strange perspective, to respond to my example with what ifs about non-existent pedestrians is just a bit strange...
Edited by akirk on Friday 6th April 23:55
RobM77 said:
What about the person you’re overtaking? Shouldn’t they be informed of what you’re doing? See my post earlier in the thread where I listed loads of reasons that person may need to know what you’re doing.
Unsurprisingly I am again with AK on this. I rarely signal to overtake; when I do, it is generally for the benefit of following traffic, to tell them I am looking for an overtake which is not yet on. Like AK, I don't think there is often a time at which it would be appropriate to signal and at which the driver whom I am going to overtake would benefit from a signal; anyway, I think it unlikely that the indicator would be seen in a mirror. And if I am at all concerned about a potential for conflict with the driver or drivers to be overtaken, then I give a warning whether with lights or horn, and give time to react before moving alongside.What is there to gain by not indicating? Is it really that much effort for you?
If I’m driving along a single carriageway and am keeping an eye on things, then have a faster car approach me from behind, I would very much like to know their intentions in the oncoming moments so I can form a gameplan if a deer runs out or I spot something at the side of the road that makes it safer for me to move out. I presume you would always indicate in the dark? Pedestrians are often unlit, and bicycles are often not lit from the side. Even in daylight you can have hidden entrances with cars coming out, especiall in summer with long grass. Furthermore, what’s the probability of you forgetting to check your mirror for the biker overtaking you at the time, or not noticing him? It”s non-zero I presume?... add a layer of safety - indicate.
I almost always agree with Waremark and yes, as he syas above, I’m not advocating indicating if it really is obvious that nobody will benefit, but if you’re actually overtaking someone then that’s pushing it a bit!
Indicating isn’t a magic fix for everything, but it’s often jolly useful to let people know what you’re about to do.
I can see we’re not getting anywhere here, so this shall be my last post on the thread.
If I’m driving along a single carriageway and am keeping an eye on things, then have a faster car approach me from behind, I would very much like to know their intentions in the oncoming moments so I can form a gameplan if a deer runs out or I spot something at the side of the road that makes it safer for me to move out. I presume you would always indicate in the dark? Pedestrians are often unlit, and bicycles are often not lit from the side. Even in daylight you can have hidden entrances with cars coming out, especiall in summer with long grass. Furthermore, what’s the probability of you forgetting to check your mirror for the biker overtaking you at the time, or not noticing him? It”s non-zero I presume?... add a layer of safety - indicate.
I almost always agree with Waremark and yes, as he syas above, I’m not advocating indicating if it really is obvious that nobody will benefit, but if you’re actually overtaking someone then that’s pushing it a bit!
Indicating isn’t a magic fix for everything, but it’s often jolly useful to let people know what you’re about to do.
I can see we’re not getting anywhere here, so this shall be my last post on the thread.
RobM77 said:
What is there to gain by not indicating? Is it really that much effort for you?
If I’m driving along a single carriageway and am keeping an eye on things, then have a faster car approach me from behind, I would very much like to know their intentions in the oncoming moments so I can form a gameplan if a deer runs out or I spot something at the side of the road that makes it safer for me to move out. I presume you would always indicate in the dark? Pedestrians are often unlit, and bicycles are often not lit from the side. Even in daylight you can have hidden entrances with cars coming out, especiall in summer with long grass. Furthermore, what’s the probability of you forgetting to check your mirror for the biker overtaking you at the time, or not noticing him? It”s non-zero I presume?... add a layer of safety - indicate.
I almost always agree with Waremark and yes, as he syas above, I’m not advocating indicating if it really is obvious that nobody will benefit, but if you’re actually overtaking someone then that’s pushing it a bit!
Indicating isn’t a magic fix for everything, but it’s often jolly useful to let people know what you’re about to do.
I can see we’re not getting anywhere here, so this shall be my last post on the thread.
nothing to do with effort, but as explained, indicating is likely to tell the car behind that I am actually overtaking, whereas the initial move out is preparatory and may not lead to an overtake, therefore indicating is likely to give the wrong message, this could actually be really dangerous because the car behind might assume I am going, and move up taking my space, and leaving me nowhere to return if I decide the overtake is not on...If I’m driving along a single carriageway and am keeping an eye on things, then have a faster car approach me from behind, I would very much like to know their intentions in the oncoming moments so I can form a gameplan if a deer runs out or I spot something at the side of the road that makes it safer for me to move out. I presume you would always indicate in the dark? Pedestrians are often unlit, and bicycles are often not lit from the side. Even in daylight you can have hidden entrances with cars coming out, especiall in summer with long grass. Furthermore, what’s the probability of you forgetting to check your mirror for the biker overtaking you at the time, or not noticing him? It”s non-zero I presume?... add a layer of safety - indicate.
I almost always agree with Waremark and yes, as he syas above, I’m not advocating indicating if it really is obvious that nobody will benefit, but if you’re actually overtaking someone then that’s pushing it a bit!
Indicating isn’t a magic fix for everything, but it’s often jolly useful to let people know what you’re about to do.
I can see we’re not getting anywhere here, so this shall be my last post on the thread.
indicating would neither help nor hinder the car in front, but one signal is read by all road users, and if read wrongly and dangerously by the car behind, then as it has no benefit to others, I would choose not to indicate...
my scenario above was in the daylight, later on last night I drove in the dark, good open roads and opportunities to overtake, but I rarely overtake in the dark as it is far more dangerous, my choice on signalling would be different.
as for bikers, as explained above, I am happy that I know what is around me, I am constantly using my mirrors and there was no biker... in fact that reminds me of a journey once on a country road, very open and with opportunities to overtake, I came up behind a car doing c. 45-50 but was conscious that there were two bikers ahead of it and two more behind me -I was in the soft-top which makes observation and communication very easy...
- I waited for the bikers to pass, they didn't
- I waved for them to pass - they didn't
- so I indicated
- then I moved right to check before passing (still indicating)
- then I overtook, still indicating
the car was very aware of my intention to overtake, so were the bikers, and I stretched out the process to give the bikers 3 or 4 opportunities to pass first, they didn't... but mid-overtake, one biker decided to pass us both in a phenomenally dangerous manoeuvre... (he then tried to kill himself 3 further times in the next 10 miles in which I followed him!)
so indicating is never a magic tool and doesn't make a manoeuvre safe, that comes from so many other aspects of how you drive...
akirk said:
you appear to have a bee in your bonnet about this and won't accept the logic, that is fine, you carry on indicating without thought, whether or not it adds clarity or confusion...
Sorry, but that's not what RobM77 said. This is what Rob and I have both been arguing:RobM77 said:
What's being discussed is whether we can all be certain there's nobody there all of the time, even when tired, it's perhaps dark etc etc. We're human and we make mistakes.
akirk said:
I understand that humans are flawed, and no-one is perfect etc. but AD is about driving to the highest standard, and there are some base levels to it - one of which has to be that you know who is around you...
Knowing who's around you is driving 101, but I wouldn't say that all AD is the highest standard. E.g. in terms of AD, an IAM pass is an entry-level standard. You can do half a dozen drives with an observer (who isn't a professional instructor) and pass an IAM test. That's hardly the highest standard, certainly when compared to higher levels (HPC, police advanced, etc).Even the absolute highest standard of drivers and riders make mistakes. Over the years, I've spent several weeks riding with police advanced riders (on biking holidays together). These guys are awesome riders. Nonetheless, I've seem them make all manner of human errors.
What Rob and I are both arguing is that erring on the side of always indicating, except where it could confuse, guards against human error better than only indicating where you see another road user who could benefit.
SVS said:
What Rob and I are both arguing is that erring on the side of always indicating, except where it could confuse, guards against human error better than only indicating where you see another road user who could benefit.
What the rest of us are arguing is that the discipline of doing something different according to what is observed guards against the natural human tendency to get into a habit. There are times when after signalling for about 20 moves in a row I've signalled for the 21st even though this time nobody was there to signal to. That's a warning that my concentration is slipping, before it gets to the stage of actually making the move irrespective of it affecting other road users.Nobody is suggesting only signal where you can see another road user who would benefit. The suggestion is to signal UNLESS you can see that nobody will benefit. In other words, if there might be someone affected that you can't yet see, you signal.
If you're bothered about someone in you blind spot that you haven't seen. Then check until you are sure, or don't make the manoeuvre.
I realise that. (I’ve done numerous AD qualifications, so spent years only indicating where it could benefit another road user.)
However, looking to see if your signal could confuse provides the same benefit in terms of concentration. Try it. I found that “indicate unless it could confuse” guards against human error better than “only indicate if someone could benefit”. Both approaches improve concentration.
The only thing is that “indicate unless it could confuse” isn’t the approach taught to British police. Whereas “only indicate if it could benefit someone” is accepted AD canon.
However, looking to see if your signal could confuse provides the same benefit in terms of concentration. Try it. I found that “indicate unless it could confuse” guards against human error better than “only indicate if someone could benefit”. Both approaches improve concentration.
The only thing is that “indicate unless it could confuse” isn’t the approach taught to British police. Whereas “only indicate if it could benefit someone” is accepted AD canon.
SVS said:
I realise that. (I’ve done numerous AD qualifications, so spent years only indicating where it could benefit another road user.)
However, looking to see if your signal could confuse provides the same benefit in terms of concentration. Try it. I found that “indicate unless it could confuse” guards against human error better than “only indicate if someone could benefit”. Both approaches improve concentration.
The only thing is that “indicate unless it could confuse” isn’t the approach taught to British police. Whereas “only indicate if it could benefit someone” is accepted AD canon.
okay, see where you are coming from - I have no issue with someone indicating when not necessary (e.g. Australian outback, only car for 100 miles etc.), as long as there is no chance it will confuse... however that wasn't what was being said entirely, the argument being put forward was that you should indicate 100% of the time because there could be someone there without your knowing, and that would concern me, before worrying about indicating, better to know who is around you!However, looking to see if your signal could confuse provides the same benefit in terms of concentration. Try it. I found that “indicate unless it could confuse” guards against human error better than “only indicate if someone could benefit”. Both approaches improve concentration.
The only thing is that “indicate unless it could confuse” isn’t the approach taught to British police. Whereas “only indicate if it could benefit someone” is accepted AD canon.
the comment about better to indicate before moving out on a motorway in case there is a motorbike in your blind spot is a worrying statement - it implies that by indicating you are okay to move, well, that motorcyclist is now dead
I am sure that if you are a biker you would far prefer a car driver to be aware of where you are, and to adjust their choices to account for your presence, then just signal and move regardless!there has been a very strong message on this thread that you should always indicate, and because you don't know the unknown, there will never be a time when you would choose not to indicate. My belief is that is dangerous, that it is the type of driving which finds a rule and sticks to it regardless of when it is appropriate, it is input rather than output driven and is not a thinking approach...
indicating isn't complex
it is one tool for communication, there are times to use it, there are times to not use it, and there is variable timing in how you use it - I would hope the AD would therefore make the decision case by case based on the context in which they find themselves... I don't see anyone advocating never indicating, but equally I believe (and have outlined some examples) that there are times when indicating is un-necessary, and even has potential to cause issues, so I will continue to communicate with other drivers in lots of ways, road positioning (under-taught in AD I feel), indicating, lights, horn, hand gestures (polite of course) - all tools available to the driver...Just one more post here, as I think akirk has made a misunderstanding which is probably critical to our disagreement. We may even agree By advocating indicating almost all of the time, I am not suggesting that one doesn’t observe who and what is around. I described this earlier. Before indicating, I have a jolly good look at who is around me to judge a) whether I could confuse anyone and b) when those other people need to know.
For example, if I’m leaving a motorway junction I look at the person behind me in lane one and judge when and if they’ll catch me as I slow, and if there’s someone passing them that would mean they’d need to get out into lane 2 earlier. There’s a huge amount of thought involved in judging the timing of indicating. I won’t expatiate any further, but you’ll get my drift I’m sure.
The only thing I do that’s contraversial is if I don’t see anyone, in the above example, when I get to the III, or before I slow, I indicate anyway. Note that the environment determines much of the potential confusion that may delay your signal or stop you signalling; I regard the chance of an unknown person affecting my signal very minor compared to the need for that unknown person to know what I’m doing in a standard fashion.
By advocating indicating almost all of the time, I am not suggesting that one doesn’t observe who and what is around. I described this earlier. Before indicating, I have a jolly good look at who is around me to judge a) whether I could confuse anyone and b) when those other people need to know.For example, if I’m leaving a motorway junction I look at the person behind me in lane one and judge when and if they’ll catch me as I slow, and if there’s someone passing them that would mean they’d need to get out into lane 2 earlier. There’s a huge amount of thought involved in judging the timing of indicating. I won’t expatiate any further, but you’ll get my drift I’m sure.
The only thing I do that’s contraversial is if I don’t see anyone, in the above example, when I get to the III, or before I slow, I indicate anyway. Note that the environment determines much of the potential confusion that may delay your signal or stop you signalling; I regard the chance of an unknown person affecting my signal very minor compared to the need for that unknown person to know what I’m doing in a standard fashion.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff