Overtake - Make Own Gap
Discussion
TartanPaint said:
Graveworm said:
Yet I am pretty sure plenty of people who do "stick to that" can get still get to places quicker than those who don't.
Of course. All advanced drivers who stick to the doctrine are driving gods who can arrive anywhere before they've even set off, while those who take the skills they've learned and dare to apply them to the real world are a dangerous menace and should be hauled from their Subarus and have their IAM lapel pins ripped from their hoodies.That doesn't recognise 'advanced driving' training & is the real world you've got to contend with.
TartanPaint said:
We know the rule book says don't overtake unless you've got a gap, but we'd never get anywhere if we stuck to that.
It's one of those rules I consciously break all the time.
Advanced Driving is about planning. In this case, planning which gap you're aiming for. But if there isn't a gap, and your plan includes forcing a gap, that's still planning!
If the overtakee refuses to yield, or closes a gap on you, planning to jump on the brakes and abort completely is STILL planning.
Let me get this straight in my head:It's one of those rules I consciously break all the time.
Advanced Driving is about planning. In this case, planning which gap you're aiming for. But if there isn't a gap, and your plan includes forcing a gap, that's still planning!
If the overtakee refuses to yield, or closes a gap on you, planning to jump on the brakes and abort completely is STILL planning.
Your method of overtaking can basically involve the premeditated decision to try and force a hole in traffic to insert your car (presumably seeing who wins on the game of 'let me in or I'll drive you off the road') into and then if the car in front of whom you're trying to position yourself contains another alpha male who doesn't believe in giving way slamming the anchors on and tucking back in before you crash head-on into the third alpha male who believes you'll chicken out and get back on the right side (as viewed from said oncoming car) before he arrives.
The only planning there is planning to drive dangerously (the legal definition being driving at a level far below that of a careful and competent driver (i.e. someone who follows the Highway Code) and it would be clear to said competent and careful driver that driving like that would be dangerous). most people with a vague interest in advanced driving wouldn't put their safety in the hands of those other two alpha males. Actually, most people full stop wouldn't want to trust their safety to any two out of those three individuals.
I personally won't do an overtake unless I had somewhere to go into before I launched. I'm pretty sure I get more than my fair share of overtakes completed and I'm not unduly held up by other road users (and even if I am, I have enough self-awareness to realise that I don't have the God-given right to be ahead of the vehicle(s) in front of my and it's not worth risking my life or liberty on enforcing that right). I'm pretty sure any of von's Padowans who exhibited such behaviour would be invited for a meeting without coffee and possibly a rather more rapid trip back to Borough than was first envisaged.
StressedDave said:
TartanPaint said:
We know the rule book says don't overtake unless you've got a gap, but we'd never get anywhere if we stuck to that.
It's one of those rules I consciously break all the time.
Advanced Driving is about planning. In this case, planning which gap you're aiming for. But if there isn't a gap, and your plan includes forcing a gap, that's still planning!
If the overtakee refuses to yield, or closes a gap on you, planning to jump on the brakes and abort completely is STILL planning.
Let me get this straight in my head:It's one of those rules I consciously break all the time.
Advanced Driving is about planning. In this case, planning which gap you're aiming for. But if there isn't a gap, and your plan includes forcing a gap, that's still planning!
If the overtakee refuses to yield, or closes a gap on you, planning to jump on the brakes and abort completely is STILL planning.
Your method of overtaking can basically involve the premeditated decision to try and force a hole in traffic to insert your car (presumably seeing who wins on the game of 'let me in or I'll drive you off the road') into and then if the car in front of whom you're trying to position yourself contains another alpha male who doesn't believe in giving way slamming the anchors on and tucking back in before you crash head-on into the third alpha male who believes you'll chicken out and get back on the right side (as viewed from said oncoming car) before he arrives.
TartanPaint said:
Of course. All advanced drivers who stick to the doctrine are driving gods who can arrive anywhere before they've even set off, while those who take the skills they've learned and dare to apply them to the real world are a dangerous menace and should be hauled from their Subarus and have their IAM lapel pins ripped from their hoodies.
When I go to the Doctor I like one who has been trained, passed exams AND learned skills in the real world. I am unsure why extra training and testing is a bad thing. But dealing with what I actually said. Vonhosen has way more to give on this but, from my limited experience, cooking driving school cars seldom (Never?) get embarrassed by "Driving School of life" exotica.
TurboHatchback said:
keirik said:
T5R+ said:
Followed a car on a well known, winding, single lanes in both directions, A road showing NSL in dry, clear and lightish traffic.
He was pretty smooth through the bends/twists with virtually no use of brakes and making progress.
We caught up with 3 cars doing 50ish and fairly close to each other who slowed and braked at virtually every bend.
Vehicle in front of me left sufficient room for a period of time and a few miles. Then he proceeded to indicate and pass the vehicle in front of him BUT had to brake and slot in - it was pretty clear that he could not pass all three in one move. He then proceeded to "pick off" the 2nd and subsequently the 3rd car ie pass, brake, slot in. Naturally, this caused the overtakee to "panic" brake.
I am torn as to who is "wrong". The guy who was ovetaking and "forcing" others to make room for him to slot in or the 3 who left virtually no room for others to pass yet would not themselves overtake.
(Chap did not seem like a hooligan, was in a run of the mill 4 door saloon, abiding by speed limits, using indicators, etc)
I don't think that's natural, that's lack of awareness of the overtakee. If you're being overtaken you should expect the overtaker to need to move back in, if there isn't a gap they should make one, if there isn't a gap they're too close to the car in front anywayHe was pretty smooth through the bends/twists with virtually no use of brakes and making progress.
We caught up with 3 cars doing 50ish and fairly close to each other who slowed and braked at virtually every bend.
Vehicle in front of me left sufficient room for a period of time and a few miles. Then he proceeded to indicate and pass the vehicle in front of him BUT had to brake and slot in - it was pretty clear that he could not pass all three in one move. He then proceeded to "pick off" the 2nd and subsequently the 3rd car ie pass, brake, slot in. Naturally, this caused the overtakee to "panic" brake.
I am torn as to who is "wrong". The guy who was ovetaking and "forcing" others to make room for him to slot in or the 3 who left virtually no room for others to pass yet would not themselves overtake.
(Chap did not seem like a hooligan, was in a run of the mill 4 door saloon, abiding by speed limits, using indicators, etc)
Personally I think if you can't overtake the entire queue in one go then don't overtake at all. It creates danger, disrupts the flow of everyone around you and rarely gains you any meaningful time
Some people just sit there inanely following, no idea what's on the road, no awareness of what's happening, and just staring at the bumper in front.
I'd rather be in front than behind people like that.
And I suspect it saved me considerable time and stress not to be stuck behind a blethering idiot completely unaware of the queue behind him.
Btw I was in a bog standard box, not a PH directors car, so there was no ego involved, just a desire to make sensible progress
Countdown said:
This thread basically seems to be about people who know their driving isn’t safe and want other people to reassure them.
If you’ve forced somebody else to take avoiding action it’s bad driving, the level of “bad” depending on how severe their avoiding action needed to be.
It think that's a touch too cynical. It's more about people who don't see anything wrong with what they do and can't understand a contrarian point of view nor indeed a degree of criticism. There's probably a few posters who have their testicular filter gain turned up too high. I'd like to think I'm not one of them, but having BTDT at RTAs for ten years, I'm a little judgemental.If you’ve forced somebody else to take avoiding action it’s bad driving, the level of “bad” depending on how severe their avoiding action needed to be.
My view is that it's very difficult to make deep judgements on whether what is described is truly dangerous. Knocking off a stream of traffic one vehicle at a time isn't necessarily dodgy and if you've got a patent gap that you can use as a valid stopping off point for each one then you can fill your boots. However, forcing a gap into existence or slotting yourself into a gap so small that your unwilling victim has to panic brake, isn't.
And if you're unsure which side of the sensible/f
kwit line you're sitting on, go and get a professional second opinion. And when you do, don't underplay your driving.
Countdown said:
This thread basically seems to be about people who know their driving isn’t safe and want other people to reassure them.
If you’ve forced somebody else to take avoiding action it’s bad driving, the level of “bad” depending on how severe their avoiding action needed to be.
This thread is getting a bit ridiculous. Do you think you can actually drive anywhere ever without forcing someone to take avoiding actions! We all take avoiding actions all the time. Avoiding driving into the car in front when it slows for traffic lights or to turn or just because he wants to drive slower, avoiding parked cars, avoiding hitting oncoming traffic when turning right etc. If you’ve forced somebody else to take avoiding action it’s bad driving, the level of “bad” depending on how severe their avoiding action needed to be.
Talking about forcing your way in again doesn’t apply unless you encounter a complete knob who deliberately closes the gap. There will typically be a gap as most people do leave a sensible gap. Obviously when you then take some of that gap then some speed/gap adjustment is necessary, but it’s little different than the continual speed adjustment requiring when driving down typical A or B roads to allow for inclines, road obstacles, corners etc etc.
Green1man said:
This thread is getting a bit ridiculous. Do you think you can actually drive anywhere ever without forcing someone to take avoiding actions! We all take avoiding actions all the time. Avoiding driving into the car in front when it slows for traffic lights or to turn or just because he wants to drive slower, avoiding parked cars, avoiding hitting oncoming traffic when turning right etc.
Talking about forcing your way in again doesn’t apply unless you encounter a complete knob who deliberately closes the gap. There will typically be a gap as most people do leave a sensible gap. Obviously when you then take some of that gap then some speed/gap adjustment is necessary, but it’s little different than the continual speed adjustment requiring when driving down typical A or B roads to allow for inclines, road obstacles, corners etc etc.
This is my view too. A procession of cars is not tied together with invisible string. It ebbs and flows and finding a gap is never an issue unless someone deliberately closes it.Talking about forcing your way in again doesn’t apply unless you encounter a complete knob who deliberately closes the gap. There will typically be a gap as most people do leave a sensible gap. Obviously when you then take some of that gap then some speed/gap adjustment is necessary, but it’s little different than the continual speed adjustment requiring when driving down typical A or B roads to allow for inclines, road obstacles, corners etc etc.
Green1man said:
This thread is getting a bit ridiculous. Do you think you can actually drive anywhere ever without forcing someone to take avoiding actions! We all take avoiding actions all the time. Avoiding driving into the car in front when it slows for traffic lights or to turn or just because he wants to drive slower, avoiding parked cars, avoiding hitting oncoming traffic when turning right etc.
Talking about forcing your way in again doesn’t apply unless you encounter a complete knob who deliberately closes the gap. There will typically be a gap as most people do leave a sensible gap. Obviously when you then take some of that gap then some speed/gap adjustment is necessary, but it’s little different than the continual speed adjustment requiring when driving down typical A or B roads to allow for inclines, road obstacles, corners etc etc.
Most people don't obey the 2 second rule so it's not knobs that are closing the gap, just regular drivers mostly.Talking about forcing your way in again doesn’t apply unless you encounter a complete knob who deliberately closes the gap. There will typically be a gap as most people do leave a sensible gap. Obviously when you then take some of that gap then some speed/gap adjustment is necessary, but it’s little different than the continual speed adjustment requiring when driving down typical A or B roads to allow for inclines, road obstacles, corners etc etc.
Forcing a gap absolutely applies IMO, if you're squeezing into a 1 second gap between 2 cars. It's not something I'd do personally and ultimately the delay is often miniscule, especially on a daily commute.
I see this often and even when I overtake. Often you pull away from a slowish driver only to end up queuing at a junction for 20 seconds. Lo and behold, slowish driver pulls up behind, negating the manoeuvre
. Either that or some tit does this forcing bullst with 3 cars, escaping a head-on in the process and you see him a few minutes later.Unless you're driving an empty road for miles, genuine progress is limited nowadays.
StressedDave said:
Let me get this straight in my head...
If you'll forgive me, I don't feel that objective was met.Why is everyone in your hypothetical scenario suddenly an aggressive alpha-male? Other than it supports your argument that forcing a gap is dangerous.
As others have said since, it's usually just a muggle who hasn't left a 2 second gap and is in a bit of a tractor-beam daze following the car in front. As soon as they see you along side, they'll lift off slightly and the job is done. Nobody is causing imaginary panic braking. Nobody is honking and closing gaps and flexing muscles and flashing headlights and getting upset and teaching lessons.
All we're talking about here is the real wold where a car length space (which should be 2 seconds, but never is) can be encouraged to become big enough for an overtaker to slot into. It happens every day, on every road in the land, without disastrous consequences. There is no need to embellish the scenario to explain that under extremely aggressive circumstances it could be dangerous. Of course it could. Every single driving moment you are dismissing potential risks because you've assessed their probability with reasonable confidence and experience. Advanced driving is about risk reduction, not risk elimination.
Keep our hypothetical scenario within the normal hypothetical parameters usually found on planet earth, and it can very often be absolutely safe to go for a gap that's not regulation length, providing it has the potential to become one, and providing there's a get-out plan.
If it wasn't a thing, this thread wouldn't exist. Arguing that the answer is always to not overtake doesn't advance the conversation at all.
I applaud any and all conversation starter that covers the grey areas, and I do confess to getting pretty cheesed off with dismissal of these discussions based on by-the-book responses. I've encountered that attitude at more than one local group, and it never, ever leads to learning. We, the slim section of the Venn diagram who are both motoring enthusiasts and advanced drivers should be the ones moving these conversations forwards instead of thumbing the book to the correct page and reciting, "Thou shalt not..."
If we could start with, "Yes, I can see that might be useful sometimes..." we might get somewhere.
TartanPaint said:
Keep our hypothetical scenario within the normal hypothetical parameters usually found on planet earth, and it can very often be absolutely safe to go for a gap that's not regulation length, providing it has the potential to become one, and providing there's a get-out plan.
Theoretically a gap of 1mm has the "potential" to become one that allows an overtake to be safely completed. That assumes the person being overtaken has (i) noticed that you are overtaking him, (ii) has recognized that you will be pulling in in front of him rather than doing a multiple overtake , and (iii) doesn't decide to "teach you a lesson", all within the space of the 3 to 5 seconds that your manouevre should take."Forcing a gap" is not what decent drivers ever need to do IMHO.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff