Indicate left after overtaking, or lane change on a motorway

[Graveworm]

RobM77 said:

Graveworm said:

RobM77 said:

I fear that posters like BertBert and I are being labelled as something we're not here, and it's based around a few mis-understandings. Let's clear these up now, not just for my sake, but also for posters like BertBert who I have great respect for:

1). Plenty of posters on here have had more training than the average UK traffic officer,

3) Strictly speaking, what I'm saying is not actually going against Roadcraft. Roadcraft says you don't need to signal to someone that isn't there.

1) Possibly but I doubt it (For driving/riding on roads) and almost certainly not at the speeds they have
3) No it doesn't


However we can agree that Roadcraft is definitely not the book that is the pinnacle of Advanced training. Even on the first day of the standard course and every subsequent course you must pass a test on Roadcraft and the Highway code. Much of it you need by rote so I completely agree it's only the basis.

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 8th August 19:46

Hmm.. I’m presuming you mean high speeds on the public road? I’ve raced since 2001 in a variety of cars, with quite a bit of success; latterly in cars way faster than any road car, to the extent that even fast road cars now feel slow to me. I suspect the same is true of Bert, who I think used to race a Radical. I’d be very surprised if many traffic officers have that experience. I presume though you are referring to Roadcraft at speed, not handling a car safely at speed?

Hence the driving riding on roads in my post which you quoted. But to be fair you did say your observation was lacking.
By 2001 I'd been racing for 15 years but next to none of the skills are transferable.
Some guy called Mansell, who apparently knew a little about peddling quick cars, was a special Constable. He did remark that, on a road, Police advanced drivers were better than him. He is currently the President of the IAM. Other members/former members are John Surtees, Graham Hill, Stirling Moss and Geoff Duke.
Passes this year include;
Jordan Albert, Max Coates, James Dorlin, Raoul Hyman, Stuart Middleton, Jack Mitchell, Sandy Mitchell, Seb Morris, Toby Sowery, Bobby Thompson and William Tregurtha..

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 8th August 23:19

[BertBert]

springfan62 said:

Road craft is the police handbook of Advanced Driving to suggest it is low bar is a pretty ignorant statement and then to suggest that you as an average driver is qualified to make changes to it based on just your own experience is laughable.

The Highway Code and Roadcraft differ from your point of view but you know better.

You could actually use this thread to learn to drive according to the Highway Code or you can just make it up as you go along. One wonders how many other areas of your driving have been modified.

When you have evidence of higher standard than Roadcraft please share until then perhaps best not to dig yourself an even deeper hole.

Gosh, what an aggressive debater you are. Also adding in ad hominem comments is way less then helpful in a debate.

I don't see that I am suggesting any specific changes to Roadcraft, although I defend my view that it is fairly low down in the standards of very good driving. I think that my views seem to be supported by those that I suspect are more skilled in driving then me.

I'm interested in what data you have about my driving to suggest specific improvements. If you'd like to debate points with me in a polite and friendly manner, I'll be happy to reciprocate. If not, do carry on and I will ignore you.

All the best
Bert

[Red Devil]

Graveworm said:

Some guy called Mansell, who apparently knew a little about peddling quick cars, was a special Constable.

Interesting. I wasn't aware that he made his living by selling performance cars.

This thread reminds me of the question. "If a tree were to fall on an uninhabited island, would there be any sound?".

[springfan62]

BertBert said:

I'm interested in what data you have about my driving to suggest specific improvements.
All the best
Bert

I have made no comments or suggestions about your driving only your view that Roadcraft is wrong in this matter.
If everyone on the road drove to that standard it would be a pretty safe place to be.

You describe Roadcraft as being "low bar' but offer no evidence of anything better as a standard.
If you have some evidence I think it would be beneficial if you could share it after all we are all surely happy to learn.

[RobM77]

Graveworm said:

By 2001 I'd been racing for 15 years but next to none of the skills are transferable.

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 8th August 23:19

That's simply not true. I'm not sure what your racing has taught you after all that time, but:

1) Once you're beyond the absolute grass roots of motorsport, everyone has their cars on the ragged edge all the way through a corner. What differentiates drivers' lap time is then two main things, one transferable to the road, and one not. The one that's not is cornering lines, that's completely irrelevant as you need a different line on the road for different reasons. The skill that is transferable is how fast you're going when you're on that ragged edge; the best drivers will use the balance of the car and the way they control it to generate a limit higher than other drivers. Have you never watched someone like Jackie Stewart or Jenson Button drive a car, any car? The car has far more composure than other drivers, at any speed. Do you remember the story I gave a few pages ago from a PHer who taught police instructors? His pupil was getting really cocky, and announced the speed he'd just taken a corner was as fast as anyone could go. The instructor knocked him down a peg or two by taking the bend significantly faster, with the car far more composed. The relevance on the road is that if we knock things back to road speeds, a good driver will have a much bigger safety margin. It's very apparent when such a driver is on control, even when going much slower than they're ultimately capable of. Safety margin is a very big deal on the road. This skill breaks down into so many things: the way steering lock is applied, the way the controls are treated at the start, middle and end of their use, etc etc. Anyone who's not experienced in driving cars on the limit on track is completely blind to how they're using the car and its controls and it's immediately obvious. Jackie Stewart used to teach people to treat the brake pedal like an eggshell and keep tennis balls on bowls on the bonnet etc, which is great and makes improvements in us all, but the fact he'd spent decades betting his life against such skills, and relying on them to make a living and gain a reputation on the world stage made him the supreme master at it, and that will always show by the way he handles a car.

2) Braking. Good racing drivers threshold brake. This gives them an instinctive feeling of how much braking capacity a car has at varying speeds, across various surfaces, bumps, rises and crests etc. As with (1), back off the speed a bit and brake gently with a driver on the road and it's immediately obvious if they're an accomplished racer because they'll gently modulate the brakes as different speeds and conditions come about. Again, it's about safety margin and keeping the car ready for doing something else if that should be required. Nobody threshold brakes on the road, but skills learnt doing that on the track change how you brake on the road at lower speeds.

3) Rev matching well. This is one thing that does directly transfer, without the safety margin clause of points 1 and 2 above. In a rear drive car on a wet road, this is a fairly significant contributor to safety margin, especially in a lightweight or powerful car like a Caterham or TVR. I'm not sure I'd want someone driving me in the wet in such a car unless they were very good at rev matching, both on and off the brakes. Roadcraft, as far as I know, doesn't encourage heel and toe; yet when I've done advanced road driving in a high performance car, heel and toe was discussed very early on (which covers our earlier point about Roadcraft not being the pinnacle).

4) Multi-tasking. This is one skill that comes just as much from advanced road driving and racing, but it is present in racing and is developed in that environment. Driving a car on the limit whilst defending from behind and attacking those in front makes you very aware of what's around you and able to compartmentalise driving and observation, which is a very important skill on the road. If I'm driving home tonight and a car in front of me loses control, whilst I'm being tailgated by someone, that'll be the nth time that's happened to me in my life (I had this when testing last Friday in fact!), not the first or second - surely experience counts for something?

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 08:52

[RobM77]

BertBert said:

Gosh, what an aggressive debater you are. Also adding in ad hominem comments is way less then helpful in a debate.

I'm increasingly feeling that we're in the midst of a few trolls here, rather than genuine posters making genuine points and who are keen on discussing things and improving their driving as a result. I'm here to pick up tips and think about my driving, whether that's from people who agree with me or not (in fact I learn more from those who don't). The level of nonsense on this thread has just about reached the point where I'll unsubscribe.

[RobM77]

Dr Jekyll said:

RobM77 said:

That's simply not true. I'm not sure what your racing has taught you after all that time, but:

1) Once you're beyond the absolute grass roots of motorsport, everyone has their cars on the ragged edge all the way through a corner. What differentiates drivers' lap time is then two main things, one transferable to the road, and one not. The one that's not is cornering lines, that's completely irrelevant as you need a different line on the road for different reasons. The skill that is transferable is how fast you're going when you're on that ragged edge; the best drivers will use the balance of the car and the way they control it to generate a limit higher than other drivers. Have you never watched someone like Jackie Stewart or Jenson Button drive a car, any car? The car has far more composure than other drivers, at any speed. Do you remember the story I gave a few pages ago from a PHer who taught police instructors? His pupil was getting really cocky, and announced the speed he'd just taken a corner was as fast as anyone could go. The instructor knocked him down a peg or two by taking the bend significantly faster, with the car far more composed. The relevance on the road is that if we knock things back to road speeds, a good driver will have a much bigger safety margin. It's very apparent when such a driver is on control, even when going much slower than they're ultimately capable of. Safety margin is a very big deal on the road. This skill breaks down into so many things: the way steering lock is applied, the way the controls are treated at the start, middle and end of their use, etc etc. Anyone who's not experienced in driving cars on the limit on track is completely blind to how they're using the car and its controls.

The safety margin on the road is about having time to react. People don't crash on the road because of the way they have applied steering lock but they might crash because they got into a situation where ragged edge handling is an issue.

Sure, yes, but it's got to help hasn't it? If a driver can take a corner at 75mph and they're taking it at only 40mph, surely they're safer than a driver who's also at 40mph but only capable of maxxing at 50mph. It's simple: they will always be safer because they're operating further under their limits; like a good seamstress sewing a button on compared to me

Dr Jekyll said:

RobM77 said:

2) Braking. Good racing drivers threshold brake. This gives them an instinctive feeling of how much braking capacity a car has at varying speeds, across various surfaces, bumps, rises and crests etc. As with (1), back off the speed a bit and brake gently with a driver on the road and it's immediately obvious if they're an accomplished racer because they'll gently modulate the brakes as different speeds and conditions come about. Again, it's about safety margin and keeping the car ready for doing something else if that should be required.

Good road drivers modulate braking according to all those issues.

Of course, yes, but they won't do it as well as someone who's been tracing the limit for years. If you want to stay a distance away from something (loss of control), then your ability to do that is all about knowing when and where that's going to happen, which you learn better when close than at a distance. Think of two kayakers who want to avoid capsizing in a rough sea: one has spent years regularly practising how far he can lean without going over and learning recovery techniques, perhaps as a competitive white water kayaker, and the other has been paddling well within his limits the whole time, bolt upright. When they find a rough sea they need to cross safely, who's less likely to capsize?

Dr Jekyll said:

RobM77 said:

4) Multi-tasking. This is one skill that comes just as much from advanced road driving and racing, but it is present in racing and is developed in that environment. Driving a car on the limit whilst defending and attacking from behind and in front makes you very aware of what's around you and able to compartmentalise driving and observation, which is a very important skill on the road.

No, there is no distinction on the road.

That doesn't make sense - I'm not sure you've understood the point I'm making. What I'm talking about is the ability to control a car well whilst your mind is focused hard on other things. This is something I distinctly remember struggling with for the first year or two of motorsport. It still separates even experienced drivers - apparently Michael Schumacher could chat on the radio like he was sat opposite you in a quiet room - the extra mental capacity he had when driving was well known. This means when something complex is going on on the road, like many lanes of traffic, a police car trying to get through, noisy kids in the back of the car etc, all at once, an accomplished driver still has enough reserves to control the car well. This is a skill that is learnt, and is better learnt in extremis than in milder situations. This is why ex fighter pilots make the best airline pilots.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 09:12

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 09:13

[Graveworm]

RobM77 said:

That's simply not true. I'm not sure what your racing has taught you after all that time, but:

1) Once you're beyond the absolute grass roots of motorsport, everyone has their cars on the ragged edge all the way through a corner. What differentiates drivers' lap time is then two main things, one transferable to the road, and one not. The one that's not is cornering lines, that's completely irrelevant as you need a different line on the road for different reasons. The skill that is transferable is how fast you're going when you're on that ragged edge; the best drivers will use the balance of the car and the way they control it to generate a limit higher than other drivers. Have you never watched someone like Jackie Stewart or Jenson Button drive a car, any car? The car has far more composure than other drivers, at any speed. Do you remember the story I gave a few pages ago from a PHer who taught police instructors? His pupil was getting really cocky, and announced the speed he'd just taken a corner was as fast as anyone could go. The instructor knocked him down a peg or two by taking the bend significantly faster, with the car far more composed. The relevance on the road is that if we knock things back to road speeds, a good driver will have a much bigger safety margin. It's very apparent when such a driver is on control, even when going much slower than they're ultimately capable of. Safety margin is a very big deal on the road. This skill breaks down into so many things: the way steering lock is applied, the way the controls are treated at the start, middle and end of their use, etc etc. Anyone who's not experienced in driving cars on the limit on track is completely blind to how they're using the car and its controls and it's immediately obvious. Jackie Stewart used to teach people to treat the brake pedal like an eggshell and keep tennis balls on bowls on the bonnet etc, which is great and makes improvements in us all, but the fact he'd spent decades betting his life against such skills, and relying on them to make a living and gain a reputation on the world stage made him the supreme master at it, and that will always show by the way he handles a car.

2) Braking. Good racing drivers threshold brake. This gives them an instinctive feeling of how much braking capacity a car has at varying speeds, across various surfaces, bumps, rises and crests etc. As with (1), back off the speed a bit and brake gently with a driver on the road and it's immediately obvious if they're an accomplished racer because they'll gently modulate the brakes as different speeds and conditions come about. Again, it's about safety margin and keeping the car ready for doing something else if that should be required. Nobody threshold brakes on the road, but skills learnt doing that on the track change how you brake on the road at lower speeds.

3) Rev matching well. This is one thing that does directly transfer, without the safety margin clause of points 1 and 2 above. In a rear drive car on a wet road, this is a fairly significant contributor to safety margin, especially in a lightweight or powerful car like a Caterham or TVR. I'm not sure I'd want someone driving me in the wet in such a car unless they were very good at rev matching, both on and off the brakes. Roadcraft, as far as I know, doesn't encourage heel and toe; yet when I've done advanced road driving in a high performance car, heel and toe was discussed very early on (which covers our earlier point about Roadcraft not being the pinnacle).

4) Multi-tasking. This is one skill that comes just as much from advanced road driving and racing, but it is present in racing and is developed in that environment. Driving a car on the limit whilst defending from behind and attacking those in front makes you very aware of what's around you and able to compartmentalise driving and observation, which is a very important skill on the road. If I'm driving home tonight and a car in front of me loses control, whilst I'm being tailgated by someone, that'll be the nth time that's happened to me in my life (I had this when testing last Friday in fact!), not the first or second - surely experience counts for something?

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 08:52

As you rightly point out driving on the road has little to do with absolute car control. The limit to how fast you can drive safely on the road is being able to stop in the distance you can see clear on your side of the road and expect it to remain so.
You are not likely to explore the absolute limits of a modern car on modern roads. Driving is about maximising the view and understanding what you can see to be safe whilst staying smooth and fast.
Threshold braking, car control and skid pan is all included in advanced driving training and is assessed. It's to a level that's plenty to meet the needs on the road. Smoothness rev matching etc is a huge chunk of what it's about.
It's not very relevant these days as modern driver aids usually do a better job and again reduce the chances of needing any in the first place.
I will happily admit I was incorrect when I said next to none of the skills are transferable but I was referring to where they exceed the standards that are expected of an Advanced driver. But any extra skill is still an advantage.
https://youtu.be/39kw8CjFB7k

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 9th August 09:27

[bigdog3]

Dixy said:

We are British, we drive on the left except when overtaking, Indicating you are going to do what you should do is pointless and could be confusing to the hard of thinking.

No we don't. Even when the inside lane is empty, we British sit brain dead at 60mph in the middle lane (or 3rd lane on 4 lane motorway) causing a mobile blockage on already busy roads. But it saves the hassle of indicating or pulling into the left lane.

All part of the British culture innit?

[RobM77]

Graveworm said:

RobM77 said:

That's simply not true. I'm not sure what your racing has taught you after all that time, but:

1) Once you're beyond the absolute grass roots of motorsport, everyone has their cars on the ragged edge all the way through a corner. What differentiates drivers' lap time is then two main things, one transferable to the road, and one not. The one that's not is cornering lines, that's completely irrelevant as you need a different line on the road for different reasons. The skill that is transferable is how fast you're going when you're on that ragged edge; the best drivers will use the balance of the car and the way they control it to generate a limit higher than other drivers. Have you never watched someone like Jackie Stewart or Jenson Button drive a car, any car? The car has far more composure than other drivers, at any speed. Do you remember the story I gave a few pages ago from a PHer who taught police instructors? His pupil was getting really cocky, and announced the speed he'd just taken a corner was as fast as anyone could go. The instructor knocked him down a peg or two by taking the bend significantly faster, with the car far more composed. The relevance on the road is that if we knock things back to road speeds, a good driver will have a much bigger safety margin. It's very apparent when such a driver is on control, even when going much slower than they're ultimately capable of. Safety margin is a very big deal on the road. This skill breaks down into so many things: the way steering lock is applied, the way the controls are treated at the start, middle and end of their use, etc etc. Anyone who's not experienced in driving cars on the limit on track is completely blind to how they're using the car and its controls and it's immediately obvious. Jackie Stewart used to teach people to treat the brake pedal like an eggshell and keep tennis balls on bowls on the bonnet etc, which is great and makes improvements in us all, but the fact he'd spent decades betting his life against such skills, and relying on them to make a living and gain a reputation on the world stage made him the supreme master at it, and that will always show by the way he handles a car.

2) Braking. Good racing drivers threshold brake. This gives them an instinctive feeling of how much braking capacity a car has at varying speeds, across various surfaces, bumps, rises and crests etc. As with (1), back off the speed a bit and brake gently with a driver on the road and it's immediately obvious if they're an accomplished racer because they'll gently modulate the brakes as different speeds and conditions come about. Again, it's about safety margin and keeping the car ready for doing something else if that should be required. Nobody threshold brakes on the road, but skills learnt doing that on the track change how you brake on the road at lower speeds.

3) Rev matching well. This is one thing that does directly transfer, without the safety margin clause of points 1 and 2 above. In a rear drive car on a wet road, this is a fairly significant contributor to safety margin, especially in a lightweight or powerful car like a Caterham or TVR. I'm not sure I'd want someone driving me in the wet in such a car unless they were very good at rev matching, both on and off the brakes. Roadcraft, as far as I know, doesn't encourage heel and toe; yet when I've done advanced road driving in a high performance car, heel and toe was discussed very early on (which covers our earlier point about Roadcraft not being the pinnacle).

4) Multi-tasking. This is one skill that comes just as much from advanced road driving and racing, but it is present in racing and is developed in that environment. Driving a car on the limit whilst defending from behind and attacking those in front makes you very aware of what's around you and able to compartmentalise driving and observation, which is a very important skill on the road. If I'm driving home tonight and a car in front of me loses control, whilst I'm being tailgated by someone, that'll be the nth time that's happened to me in my life (I had this when testing last Friday in fact!), not the first or second - surely experience counts for something?

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 08:52

As you rightly point out driving on the road has little to do with absolute car control. The limit to how fast you can drive safely on the road is being able to stop in the distance you can see clear on your side of the road and expect it to remain so.
You are not likely to explore the absolute limits of a modern car on modern roads. Driving is about maximising the view and understanding what you can see to be safe whilst staying smooth and fast.
Threshold braking, car control and skid pan is all included in advanced driving training and is assessed. It's to a level that's plenty to meet the needs on the road. Smoothness rev matching etc is a huge chunk of what it's about.
It's not very relevant these days as modern driver aids usually do a better job and again reduce the chances of needing any in the first place.
I will happily admit I was incorrect when I said next to none of the skills are transferable but I was referring to where they exceed the standards that are expected of an Advanced driver. But any extra skill is still an advantage.
https://youtu.be/39kw8CjFB7k

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 9th August 09:27

I think where we differ on this is on two levels: 1) The effect that being capable at high speeds has on one's safe road driving at low speeds, and 2) the difference in ability between someone who's had a little training in the skills you list and someone who's practised them to competitive levels for years.

The skills you listed aren't really learnt to any degree of relevant competence after a few days of training, they take years of experience and coaching to master. This is why I used my kayaker analogy - all kayakers learn to detect the onset of a capsize and how to recover, but it should be pretty obvious that someone who practises these skills every day is going to be vastly better and safer in rough seas than someone who has a refresher course once a year. Skid pans, in my humble opinion, are actually counter productive in many ways, because low speed car control is very different (and often opposite) to high speed car control; that applies to sliding around as much as it does not sliding around.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 10:01

[BertBert]

springfan62 said:

I have made no comments or suggestions about your driving only your view that Roadcraft is wrong in this matter.
If everyone on the road drove to that standard it would be a pretty safe place to be.

You describe Roadcraft as being "low bar' but offer no evidence of anything better as a standard.
If you have some evidence I think it would be beneficial if you could share it after all we are all surely happy to learn.

I don't think there's much learning to do from my comments per se, and I've expressed my thoughts. And by the way I'm not demeaning Roadcraft in any way, it's been very helpful to me (when I discovered it) and my kids as they learned to drive.

In summary Roadcraft was designed to be very systematic and very testable. It was designed that way to take normal drivers in plod and quickly get them to a better standard and part of that standard is a very systematic way of driving. It focusses a lot (and rightly so) on observation and planning. It has a much lower focus on car control techniques and an even lower focus on maximising speed. But it's designed for the masses not the really talented. It doesn't take a lot of time to master (as in days of effort rather than weeks or months.

So if you were designing a curriculum to train and produce the top police pursuit drivers (for example), would it be Roadcraft and done in what 3-4 days or would it last longer?

Bert

[Graveworm]

BertBert said:

I don't think there's much learning to do from my comments per se, and I've expressed my thoughts. And by the way I'm not demeaning Roadcraft in any way, it's been very helpful to me (when I discovered it) and my kids as they learned to drive.

In summary Roadcraft was designed to be very systematic and very testable. It was designed that way to take normal drivers in plod and quickly get them to a better standard and part of that standard is a very systematic way of driving. It focusses a lot (and rightly so) on observation and planning. It has a much lower focus on car control techniques and an even lower focus on maximising speed. But it's designed for the masses not the really talented. It doesn't take a lot of time to master (as in days of effort rather than weeks or months.

So if you were designing a curriculum to train and produce the top police pursuit drivers (for example), would it be Roadcraft and done in what 3-4 days or would it last longer?

Bert

Where do you get this 3-4 days from? It varies. In my case it was 10 weeks in total. Spread over 3 courses with a consolidation period in between each. I already had a race licence and had passed the civilian IAM test before starting the first course. There is also refresher training, specialist bolt ons and assessments. Traffic officer will close to double that with Bike and Tpac.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 9th August 10:02

[Graveworm]

Red Devil said:

Interesting. I wasn't aware that he made his living by selling performance cars.

This thread reminds me of the question. "If a tree were to fall on an uninhabited island, would there be any sound?".

Touché

That depends on if it falls on someone who didn't see the forest for the trees.

[Graveworm]

RobM77 said:

I think where we differ on this is on two levels: 1) The effect that being capable at high speeds has on one's safe road driving at low speeds, and 2) the difference in ability between someone who's had a little training in the skills you list and someone who's practised them to competitive levels for years.

The skills you listed aren't really learnt to any degree of relevant competence after a few days of training, they take years of experience and coaching to master. This is why I used my kayaker analogy - all kayakers learn to detect the onset of a capsize and how to recover, but it should be pretty obvious that someone who practises these skills every day is going to be vastly better and safer in rough seas than someone who has a refresher course once a year. Skid pans, in my humble opinion, are actually counter productive in many ways, because low speed car control is very different (and often opposite) to high speed car control; that applies to sliding around as much as it does not sliding around.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 10:01

There is no comparison between the level of mechanical car control of an advanced driver and a halfway decent racing driver, even more so for a good one. It is of course an advantage at all speeds. But the returns diminish very quickly. Cradle cars, airfields and dry pans are surprisingly good for training at higher speeds alongside traditional wet ovals straights etc. People with race experience will and do excel here. The standard they are required to reach though is more than adequate for what is needed. It makes up very little of where problems occur.

A good analogy for me is, it really helps a racing driver to fully understand the physics of cars and the engineering of the components. Someone with years of experience in race car design, will have a greater understanding of this and this will give an increased benefit, but the advantages diminish exponentially and other factors carry far more weight.

[RobM77]

Graveworm said:

RobM77 said:

I think where we differ on this is on two levels: 1) The effect that being capable at high speeds has on one's safe road driving at low speeds, and 2) the difference in ability between someone who's had a little training in the skills you list and someone who's practised them to competitive levels for years.

The skills you listed aren't really learnt to any degree of relevant competence after a few days of training, they take years of experience and coaching to master. This is why I used my kayaker analogy - all kayakers learn to detect the onset of a capsize and how to recover, but it should be pretty obvious that someone who practises these skills every day is going to be vastly better and safer in rough seas than someone who has a refresher course once a year. Skid pans, in my humble opinion, are actually counter productive in many ways, because low speed car control is very different (and often opposite) to high speed car control; that applies to sliding around as much as it does not sliding around.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 10:01

There is no comparison between the level of mechanical car control of an advanced driver and a halfway decent racing driver, even more so for a good one. It is of course an advantage at all speeds. But the returns diminish very quickly. Cradle cars, airfields and dry pans are surprisingly good for training at higher speeds alongside traditional wet ovals straights etc. People with race experience will and do excel here. The standard they are required to reach though is more than adequate for what is needed. It makes up very little of where problems occur.

A good analogy for me is, it really helps a racing driver to fully understand the physics of cars and the engineering of the components. Someone with years of experience in race car design, will have a greater understanding of this and this will give an increased benefit, but the advantages diminish exponentially and other factors carry far more weight.

I completely agree that the benefits of such experience aren't worth anywhere near as much as the same time spent on Roadcraft techniques. I was merely arguing against your statement from earlier:

Graveworm said:

By 2001 I'd been racing for 15 years but next to none of the skills are transferable.

I strongly disagree with that. Spending a life on the limit, forced through competition to improve constantly, doesn't just give you skills on the limit, it gives you skills that are apparent in all situations in a car. Listen to an opera singer talking - they don't have to be singing at 100dB to sound so much better than you and I would talking to a small group of people at 70dB. Nobody's suggesting that 20 years training to be a singer is necessary to train small groups of people, but someone with those skills will have a far better voice than someone without those skills, that's a fact. Even if two people were experienced trainers and communicators for another 20 years, the one starting with 20 years operatic experience would still be noticeable.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 10:55

[sibriers]

Long-time lurker here - What a lively and informative thread this has turned out to be!

I can honestly say that I was taught in the 90s to ALWAYS indicate when manoeuvring and was under the impression that anyone not doing so was just being presumptuous and / or lazy.

Reading this discussion will change my assessment of drivers who don't indicate in these situations BUT will not change my behaviour or how I treat such road users: In my mind, the only safe assumption to make on the road is that EVERYONE else on the road is incapable of driving in a safe, reasonable and sympathetic manner and whether they indicate or not doesn't change my responses.
- I'm often able to anticipate when some eejut is going to jump into the safe gap I've left to the car in front using the observation skills that many posters here presume I don't have because I always indicate. (Just to further warp their reality, I drive a BMW!)

I indicate automatically in the same way I change gear and rev-match according to conditions because my conscious mind is (at least partially) occupied with observing and anticipating other user's behaviours, not whether my indicating will be seen or useful to them (I don't care). Honestly, why even make a decision which a) is unnecessary and b) potentially wrong?
Please don't misunderstand - I make no assumption that indication gives me rights to a gap or that other drivers will even notice or react differently because of it, but it does give me peace of mind that in case of an accident, testimony and video footage will confirm that I acted rationally and safely while indicating my intentions to all parties. (I certainly hope that being "confused" by someone indicating while safely manoeuvring is not a legal defence?)
- I'm pretty sure that when L5 driverless cars actually arrive they will indicate in all situations for some of these reasons. (In this case why program / train AI to make a decision that can be avoided through consistent use of a signal? I expect this will become accepted behaviour, perhaps through marketing or appropriate news stories if only for the manufacturers to avoid possible legal challenges)

Anyone that can possibly be confused by my "overindulgent" and "dangerous" indicating are probably the same people I spot from a mile off maintaining poor lane discipline, braking unnecessarily or at the last possible moment, hogging lanes and not paying attention to closing speeds of traffic in other lanes. (See - I can make sweeping assumptions too!) These are the people I will actively, safely overtake at the earliest opportunity while indicating my return to my previous lane.
- Anyone here care to admit they're one of THOSE people? Thought not, so why the hoo-ha?
/endrant

[bigdog3]

sibriers said:

In my mind, the only safe assumption to make on the road is that EVERYONE else on the road is incapable of driving in a safe, reasonable and sympathetic manner and whether they indicate or not doesn't change my responses.

Yes totally Drive defensively, take control of the situation and do not leave your destiny (eg safety) in the hands of others.

[RobM77]

This hints at another reason for indicating; it instils trust in those around you.

I'm sure we all do this, but when I'm driving I try to evaluate those around me: the lorry driver who keeps drifting in his lane is often on the phone, the driver who never indicates is often not aware of their surroundings, the car I see jerking around is probably being driven with one hand at the top of the wheel. These behaviours all have consequences; for example you don't want that lorry driver behind you if you have to brake suddenly!

By failing to indicate when returning to your lane on a motorway, you are sending a message to the driver you've just overtaken that you may well do something unexpected in the next few minutes whilst you're in range of them. In a perfect world of Roadcraft, this doesn't apply, but we don't live in that world: the overwhelming majority of drivers who don't indicate are simply bad drivers, so others will assume this.

[Graveworm]

sibriers said:

Long-time lurker here - What a lively and informative thread this has turned out to be!

I can honestly say that I was taught in the 90s to ALWAYS indicate when manoeuvring a

Nice first post You probably weren't precisely taught that given, you would have had to read the Highway code (and even had a written test after 96) and could potentially fail your test for doing it that way. But the:
Give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
&
make sure your signals will not confuse others - correctly gets downplayed along with what "Signal" means.

There seems to be a view that, because some think there are times when it's best not to indicate, that they are saying everyone should do it that way. It's why it gets such a passionate debate, as some think their driving is being criticised even though they are just doing what they have been taught and think is right. The former group, of course, have the benefit of being able to do either and have tried both so they can understand the difference.
It's a different approach that needs to be learnt even probably coached and tested. The default position is, if in doubt indicate, and many unnecessary indications are much better than one missed necessary indication.

[Vaux]

RobM77 said:

We've explained this already. My initial process is the same as yours: I scan for the other road users I'm communicating to and decide when and where I will signal to best communicate my intended actions. If I don't see anyone, I signal about a second before I change speed or course. That second action is in addition to what you do, not instead of it. The reason I do it is because I know my observation isn't perfect. I have 6/4 vision and have raced for 18 years without ever crashing, so my judgement and reactions are good, but I know I'm not infallible and everyone makes mistakes - that's why I do that second operation of signalling anyway. I have missed things before - I can think of two occasions when I've failed to spot someone; both on the public road.

Why do you only signal one second before the change of speed or course - is that really useful to anyone you've missed? Presumably you signal earlier if you actually see someone, so why not maintain this timing?