Indicate left after overtaking, or lane change on a motorway
Discussion
Graveworm said:
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.
Cheers Graveworm!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.
Rule 103 said:
Signals warn and inform other road users, including pedestrians (see ‘Signals to other road users), of your intended actions. You should always
- Give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
- Use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off
- Cancel them after use
- Make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier it may give the impression that you intend to turn into the road. Your brake lights will warn traffic behind you that you are slowing down
- Use an arm signal to emphasise or reinforce your signal if necessary. Remember that signalling does not give you priority.
- Give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
- Use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off
- Cancel them after use
- Make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier it may give the impression that you intend to turn into the road. Your brake lights will warn traffic behind you that you are slowing down
- Use an arm signal to emphasise or reinforce your signal if necessary. Remember that signalling does not give you priority.
Rule 133 said:
If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over.
Apologies if I've missed something out, (may be a lack of searching / poorly designed site?) but the combination of these two rules regarding signalling seems pretty definitive? #103 even gives an example of where confusion may arise, but this seems to be interpreted by many posters as "minimise signalling to avoid confusion".Perhaps I'm missing the specific rule #? Will have a skim of the '96 edition when I get home..
I reckon this pretty much sums it all up - https://youtu.be/qHFi26xB-OQ?t=414 -
His point about absolutism is well made imo.
It also demolishes the theory that all drivers sporting a flat cap are a danger to themselves and others.
Btw, if you get the chance to have a day out with him, grab it with both hands!
Unbeatable ROI.
His point about absolutism is well made imo.
It also demolishes the theory that all drivers sporting a flat cap are a danger to themselves and others.
Btw, if you get the chance to have a day out with him, grab it with both hands!
Unbeatable ROI.
sibriers said:
Graveworm said:
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.
Cheers Graveworm!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.
Rule 103 said:
Signals warn and inform other road users, including pedestrians (see ‘Signals to other road users), of your intended actions. You should always
- Give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
- Use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off
- Cancel them after use
- Make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier it may give the impression that you intend to turn into the road. Your brake lights will warn traffic behind you that you are slowing down
- Use an arm signal to emphasise or reinforce your signal if necessary. Remember that signalling does not give you priority.
- Give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
- Use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off
- Cancel them after use
- Make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier it may give the impression that you intend to turn into the road. Your brake lights will warn traffic behind you that you are slowing down
- Use an arm signal to emphasise or reinforce your signal if necessary. Remember that signalling does not give you priority.
Rule 133 said:
If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over.
Apologies if I've missed something out, (may be a lack of searching / poorly designed site?) but the combination of these two rules regarding signalling seems pretty definitive? #103 even gives an example of where confusion may arise, but this seems to be interpreted by many posters as "minimise signalling to avoid confusion".Perhaps I'm missing the specific rule #? Will have a skim of the '96 edition when I get home..
Firstly a signal is not just indicators. It's not minimise to avoid confusion. It's based on that unnecessary signals, that don't give relevant information to other road users, can only confuse or distract.
As it says it's to warn and inform (Give information). It's about advising (Informing) other road users what you are going to do. A huge section of advanced driving, which runs through it all is information - giving, seeking and and receiving. If that's not why you are doing it, then no requirement to go any further. What should always be done, when signalling, is not the same as always signal. You will often advise people what you are doing in every walk of life but you don't do it constantly, if it doesn't help them. The Roadcraft approach is endorsed by the DVSA as well as ROSPA etc.
It's not just the Road users you can see, it's also the ones who might see a signal as the manoeuvre progresses and that can change; that is all part of the plan and the decision whether to signal. Often you will signal for their benefit.
The difference in the number of times I'll indicate to someone who did it for everything is still tiny. Personally I have started to indicate in the, much maligned, circumstances where no one will see. I get it makes no difference either way and I wouldn't do it if under assessment; but, in those cases, since it can do no harm, I do it in case something changes. Indicating is nearly always better than not.
Edited by Graveworm on Friday 9th August 20:50
Lily the Pink said:
Vipers said:
Think I will stick to MSM, if no one is there to see my signal, I don't think the world will end.
So how many people, approaching this junction and having checked their mirrors to find there is no one behind them, would indicate before turning left ?
There is a blind bend ahead and something could appear AT ANY SECOND! (and he will want to know what you are doing).
nonsequitur said:
Lily the Pink said:
Vipers said:
Think I will stick to MSM, if no one is there to see my signal, I don't think the world will end.
So how many people, approaching this junction and having checked their mirrors to find there is no one behind them, would indicate before turning left ?There is a blind bend ahead and something could appear AT ANY SECOND! (and he will want to know what you are doing).
RobM77 said:
nonsequitur said:
Lily the Pink said:
Vipers said:
Think I will stick to MSM, if no one is there to see my signal, I don't think the world will end.
So how many people, approaching this junction and having checked their mirrors to find there is no one behind them, would indicate before turning left ?There is a blind bend ahead and something could appear AT ANY SECOND! (and he will want to know what you are doing).
RobM77 said:
Actually I get in this situation a lot and people who don’t indicate in the camera car’s perspective are bloody annoying. The key is the fact the road is too narrow for two cars to pass on. When taking that blind bend up ahead, coming towards the camera, a good driver’s eyes will be looking up ahead the whole time, and the instant he sees a car not indicating, he’ll pull in to let the car pass. The reason for the urgency is you don’t want to go stopping after a blind bend, for obvious reasons. What always happens to me is that the other car only indicates and takes the turn after I’ve stopped, unecessarily. That’s really annoying.
What blind bend?Lily the Pink said:
If a vehicle appeared coming towards you, would you not immediately re-evaluate your plan and indicate then ?
He doesn't need to, he's already indicating.Is there a disadvantage to him doing so?
Graveworm said:
What blind bend?
Ok, "that bend that may go in a different direction than you'd assume it does from what you see here, but can't tell sufficiently to answer the question posed because the image isn't especially wonderful".Lily the Pink said:
RobM77 said:
nonsequitur said:
Lily the Pink said:
Vipers said:
Think I will stick to MSM, if no one is there to see my signal, I don't think the world will end.
So how many people, approaching this junction and having checked their mirrors to find there is no one behind them, would indicate before turning left ?There is a blind bend ahead and something could appear AT ANY SECOND! (and he will want to know what you are doing).
Foss62 said:
That needn’t be a problem. Just tell the assessor that you are indicating due to the possibility of an oncoming vehicle.
What they don’t like are automatic, unplanned actions.
Unless it shows that the vision isn't being lifted enough, as it might here. Where is that oncoming vehicle coming from that could benefit from a signal? Usually accompanied by a sarcastic looking up at the sky .. What they don’t like are automatic, unplanned actions.
Edited by Graveworm on Friday 9th August 22:57
Graveworm said:
Unless it shows that the vision isn't being lifted enough, as it might here. Where is that oncoming vehicle coming from that could benefit from a signal?
Yes I think you are right, looks like the hedgerow is on the far side so you should be able to see oncoming traffic a fair distance away.Lily the Pink said:
RobM77 said:
Yes, but usually that process doesn’t complete until after the other guy’s stopped.
Really ? That makes me think your reactions must be extremely slow.Edited by RobM77 on Friday 9th August 23:29
Lily the Pink said:
RobM77 said:
nonsequitur said:
Lily the Pink said:
Vipers said:
Think I will stick to MSM, if no one is there to see my signal, I don't think the world will end.
So how many people, approaching this junction and having checked their mirrors to find there is no one behind them, would indicate before turning left ?There is a blind bend ahead and something could appear AT ANY SECOND! (and he will want to know what you are doing).
Graveworm said:
Those are lovely but nothing to do with someone using an indicator to move left when it may not be necessary.Is the first video meant to represent 7 cars all directly in front of me, indicating, constantly swapping positions and moving between the 3 lanes of a motorway erratically?
Where is the research and demonstration that indicating (specifically indicating and nothing else) is having a disastrous effect on drivers and/or contributing to accidents?
For example in that Skoda advert, if someone was walking along a road or looking out of a window, someone would notice a lamppost suddenly appear. Not to mention that the brain is conditioned to look for things that can or will happen. As we don’t have teleportation yet then objects can’t randomly materialise or disappear like in the video anyway.
As it currently stands it’s seems anecdotal and at best tenuously linked to some information about the brains ability to process imagery on a screen.
r250 said:
Those are lovely but nothing to do with someone using an indicator to move left when it may not be necessary.
Is the first video meant to represent 7 cars all directly in front of me, indicating, constantly swapping positions and moving between the 3 lanes of a motorway erratically?
Where is the research and demonstration that indicating (specifically indicating and nothing else) is having a disastrous effect on drivers and/or contributing to accidents?
For example in that Skoda advert, if someone was walking along a road or looking out of a window, someone would notice a lamppost suddenly appear. Not to mention that the brain is conditioned to look for things that can or will happen. As we don’t have teleportation yet then objects can’t randomly materialise or disappear like in the video anyway.
As it currently stands it’s seems anecdotal and at best tenuously linked to some information about the brains ability to process imagery on a screen.
It shows that we don't notice things when we are looking at something else. You can do a Google search for signal clutter or selective attention driving or processing visual information and there is dry research out there lots of it. Most of it is about road signs and to save you the trouble, I am pretty sure none measure the impact of a single indicator so that must mean it has no effect? Or you could infer that a flashing Amber light, that we are conditioned to look out for, might, from all the other things that do. It might also de-emphasise necessary signals. Is the first video meant to represent 7 cars all directly in front of me, indicating, constantly swapping positions and moving between the 3 lanes of a motorway erratically?
Where is the research and demonstration that indicating (specifically indicating and nothing else) is having a disastrous effect on drivers and/or contributing to accidents?
For example in that Skoda advert, if someone was walking along a road or looking out of a window, someone would notice a lamppost suddenly appear. Not to mention that the brain is conditioned to look for things that can or will happen. As we don’t have teleportation yet then objects can’t randomly materialise or disappear like in the video anyway.
As it currently stands it’s seems anecdotal and at best tenuously linked to some information about the brains ability to process imagery on a screen.
We can only process very few visual things at a time. We can do it very quickly. We do have selective attention. An unnecessary signal is not a big deal in the scheme of things but it is something unecessary and visual. If it does no good why increase the risk even slightly if it is avoidable?
Edited by Graveworm on Saturday 10th August 11:33
RobM77 said:
I think it was posted this forum, but it may have been elsewhere, but I remember reading a fighter pilot’s perspective to observation and how easily we can miss things. It was all highly applicable to road driving and no, we can’t trust our observation 100%.
Unlike a fighter pilot, motorists live in a much less demanding 2D world. And he copes with events happening an order of magnitude faster.Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff