Men and overtaking
Discussion
Dizeee said:
DocSteve said:
Dizee, are you sure you are not winding us up??
No, not a wind up. I guess we all do things differently and I can only go by what I have been taught over the years. There is a lot I don't agree with written above. Overtaking a bus when it is only possible if the bus complies? There shouldn't be an if, but or any form of uncertainty about it. If its on it's on, and if there is any doubt hold back. An M5 overtaking a buss should not require any compliance from a bus driver on a road that is safe and suitable to overtake on.
Indicating in queues of traffic, seriously, how many people look and count off cars "not indicating" behind when pulling out for an overtake... your hazard is the group of cars as a whole and part of your risk assessment is the likelihood of movement judged by position and/or speed of an of them.
Bikers sitting in blind spots, yes they do, but that's why you shoulder check prior to moving out.
Indicating to let others know behind - I have already answered this - it should be obvious and apparent what you are doing by virtue of your positioning.
There may be some infrequent circumstances where an indication may benefit, but these are very infrequent for me. The only time I ever recall doing one is when I was awaiting opportunity for an overtake which I knew was imminent, and in the far distance behind me was a motorbike approaching at speed. I gave 3 flicks of my offside indicator which allowed him to roll off and come to rest behind me, removing the chance of him coming into conflict with my intentions. Had he have carried on then obviously I would have not continued with my intention, but as it turned out, it worked well. He respected my awareness of his presence and intentions, and I respected his response to my signal. This is what taking, using and giving information is all about.
Maybe it's my fault. Whenever I discuss driving it is with progress in mind. It is just inherent in my driving style and has been drummed into me now for over 16 years. There is no need, requirement or time for needless signals when your positioning makes it obvious what you are going to do, and in most circumstances will be off and away within a matter of seconds anyway.
Edited by Dizeee on Saturday 16th May 11:58
Nobody is infallible and your only as good as your last drive. One of the most vital tools in the drivers armoury is the ability to self analyse, recognise room for improvement and adjust behaviour accordingly.
But this to me is a simple point, and not as in depth as other AD related topics. I am far more interested in the risk assessment, conditions and circumstances of the overtake itself. What could be the unforeseen risks and what are your contingencies for the unexpected? Where is your next stop over gap, do you need to use it, could you pass more than one vehicle and how are they likely to react? Who and how many are behind, how long have they been there and what do you expect their response to be? All these are some, not all, of more pertinent thought processes than placing an indicator on.
I'm not saying don't do it, I am saying it is unnecessary, and when I see it in use I equate it to a lack of education.
But this to me is a simple point, and not as in depth as other AD related topics. I am far more interested in the risk assessment, conditions and circumstances of the overtake itself. What could be the unforeseen risks and what are your contingencies for the unexpected? Where is your next stop over gap, do you need to use it, could you pass more than one vehicle and how are they likely to react? Who and how many are behind, how long have they been there and what do you expect their response to be? All these are some, not all, of more pertinent thought processes than placing an indicator on.
I'm not saying don't do it, I am saying it is unnecessary, and when I see it in use I equate it to a lack of education.
These days I prioritise safely, rather than progress.
I’m quite happy to indicate a lane change, where I know anybody can see me.
The civilian HW code teaches indication, which is the only education most drivers have ever had.
I am also not always aware of the bikes / pedestrians and walkers in the country side at gaps in hedges!
More information good.
I’m quite happy to indicate a lane change, where I know anybody can see me.
The civilian HW code teaches indication, which is the only education most drivers have ever had.
I am also not always aware of the bikes / pedestrians and walkers in the country side at gaps in hedges!
More information good.
Edited by Red 5 on Sunday 17th May 09:33
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
RobM77 said:
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
What about those it could mislead or may misinterpret it?vonhosen said:
RobM77 said:
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
What about those it could mislead or may misinterpret it?As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
Dizeee said:
No, not a wind up. I guess we all do things differently and I can only go by what I have been taught over the years.
There is a lot I don't agree with written above. Overtaking a bus when it is only possible if the bus complies? There shouldn't be an if, but or any form of uncertainty about it. If its on it's on, and if there is any doubt hold back. An M5 overtaking a buss should not require any compliance from a bus driver on a road that is safe and suitable to overtake on.
Indicating in queues of traffic, seriously, how many people look and count off cars "not indicating" behind when pulling out for an overtake... your hazard is the group of cars as a whole and part of your risk assessment is the likelihood of movement judged by position and/or speed of any of them.
Bikers sitting in blind spots, yes they do, but that's why you shoulder check prior to moving out.
Indicating to let others know behind - I have already answered this - it should be obvious and apparent what you are doing by virtue of your positioning.
There may be some infrequent circumstances where an indication may benefit, but these are very infrequent for me. The only time I ever recall doing one is when I was awaiting opportunity for an overtake which I knew was imminent, and in the far distance behind me was a motorbike approaching at speed. I gave 3 flicks of my offside indicator which allowed him to roll off and come to rest behind me, removing the chance of him coming into conflict with my intentions. Had he have carried on then obviously I would have not continued with my intention, but as it turned out, it worked well. He respected my awareness of his presence and intentions, and I respected his response to my signal. This is what taking, using and giving information is all about.
Maybe it's my fault. Whenever I discuss driving it is with progress in mind. It is just inherent in my driving style and has been drummed into me now for over 16 years. There is no need, requirement or time for needless signals when your positioning makes it obvious what you are going to do, and in most circumstances will be off and away within a matter of seconds anyway.
Nothing necessarily wrong with an overtake that's impossible without compliance. Last-but-one cycle I did, with a car behind, I pulled into a passing place to let them pass.That of course meant slowing down until they'd passed, and you'd be within your rights to decline to aid such an overtake.There is a lot I don't agree with written above. Overtaking a bus when it is only possible if the bus complies? There shouldn't be an if, but or any form of uncertainty about it. If its on it's on, and if there is any doubt hold back. An M5 overtaking a buss should not require any compliance from a bus driver on a road that is safe and suitable to overtake on.
Indicating in queues of traffic, seriously, how many people look and count off cars "not indicating" behind when pulling out for an overtake... your hazard is the group of cars as a whole and part of your risk assessment is the likelihood of movement judged by position and/or speed of any of them.
Bikers sitting in blind spots, yes they do, but that's why you shoulder check prior to moving out.
Indicating to let others know behind - I have already answered this - it should be obvious and apparent what you are doing by virtue of your positioning.
There may be some infrequent circumstances where an indication may benefit, but these are very infrequent for me. The only time I ever recall doing one is when I was awaiting opportunity for an overtake which I knew was imminent, and in the far distance behind me was a motorbike approaching at speed. I gave 3 flicks of my offside indicator which allowed him to roll off and come to rest behind me, removing the chance of him coming into conflict with my intentions. Had he have carried on then obviously I would have not continued with my intention, but as it turned out, it worked well. He respected my awareness of his presence and intentions, and I respected his response to my signal. This is what taking, using and giving information is all about.
Maybe it's my fault. Whenever I discuss driving it is with progress in mind. It is just inherent in my driving style and has been drummed into me now for over 16 years. There is no need, requirement or time for needless signals when your positioning makes it obvious what you are going to do, and in most circumstances will be off and away within a matter of seconds anyway.
Edited by Dizeee on Saturday 16th May 16:15
But, in the bus situation, I expect it involved slowing a bit to pull left, and then there's space. As long as the bus driver is happy to do so, the overtake is probably on.
vonhosen said:
RobM77 said:
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
What about those it could mislead or may misinterpret it?
Red 5 said:
vonhosen said:
RobM77 said:
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
What about those it could mislead or may misinterpret it?As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
If we are making generalisations, people's position &/or speed is often a better/more reliable indication of people's intent than a bulb (illuminated or not).
That's not to say that bulbs can't be used thoughtfully & usefully (though are often misused thoughtlessly).
I prefer considered & thoughtful use rather than the absolutes of always or never used.
Red 5 said:
There’s always somebody ready to misinterpret anything, and be the exception to any rule.
As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
On a multi lane carriageway where overtakes are being carried out then yes, signalling for a lane change is definitely advisable ( so long as your are in close enough proximity of another road user who will benefit from it ).As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
But when overtaking vehicles on a single lane carriageway where you have to use the opposing lane, I would have to have a very good reason to start thinking about indication regardless of what is behind or ahead. Once the follow position has yielded sufficient vision to offer an overtake, I would be mirror & shoulder and out to the overtake position, where I would give one final forward observation whilst speed matched to ensure there are no additional hazards revealed. At the same time as this I would be in the nearside mirror to ensure I still have a safe return gap and I am not being shut out by the car behind. That process takes around 1 / 2 seconds and is dynamic. I wouldn't be worrying about indicating at any point.
In some circumstances I also would consider a line straddle to afford additional vision. This has the benefit of increasing your depth of vision, using position to indicate intentions to those behind AND also preventing them moving up and shutting you out, hence preserving your own safe space throughout. Von probably won't like that, and it perhaps isn't something I would do under test conditions, but, I find in some limited circumstances it can be useful to gain some compliance over cars behind that may need some management.
Dizeee said:
Red 5 said:
There’s always somebody ready to misinterpret anything, and be the exception to any rule.
As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
On a multi lane carriageway where overtakes are being carried out then yes, signalling for a lane change is definitely advisable ( so long as your are in close enough proximity of another road user who will benefit from it ).As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
But when overtaking vehicles on a single lane carriageway where you have to use the opposing lane, I would have to have a very good reason to start thinking about indication regardless of what is behind or ahead. Once the follow position has yielded sufficient vision to offer an overtake, I would be mirror & shoulder and out to the overtake position, where I would give one final forward observation whilst speed matched to ensure there are no additional hazards revealed. At the same time as this I would be in the nearside mirror to ensure I still have a safe return gap and I am not being shut out by the car behind. That process takes around 1 / 2 seconds and is dynamic. I wouldn't be worrying about indicating at any point.
In some circumstances I also would consider a line straddle to afford additional vision. This has the benefit of increasing your depth of vision, using position to indicate intentions to those behind AND also preventing them moving up and shutting you out, hence preserving your own safe space throughout. Von probably won't like that, and it perhaps isn't something I would do under test conditions, but, I find in some limited circumstances it can be useful to gain some compliance over cars behind that may need some management.
Most of the thought process occurs well before this though.
Moving up to and retreating from a follow position ( or stretching the elastic ) is dependant on a sound awareness of where any options / hazards may lurk ( junctions, turnings, drives, vision losses, broken down cars etc ). Being held back using the 2 second rule should afford you early vision beyond and around the car(s) your going to overtake to anticipate an opportunity. Moving up to the follow position when suitable is the next stage, whereby your going to be at the start of the process above. And of course, this should all be done seamlessly using acceleration sense based on what you observe.
Moving up to and retreating from a follow position ( or stretching the elastic ) is dependant on a sound awareness of where any options / hazards may lurk ( junctions, turnings, drives, vision losses, broken down cars etc ). Being held back using the 2 second rule should afford you early vision beyond and around the car(s) your going to overtake to anticipate an opportunity. Moving up to the follow position when suitable is the next stage, whereby your going to be at the start of the process above. And of course, this should all be done seamlessly using acceleration sense based on what you observe.
Dizeee said:
Most of the thought process occurs well before this though.
Moving up to and retreating from a follow position ( or stretching the elastic ) is dependant on a sound awareness of where any options / hazards may lurk ( junctions, turnings, drives, vision losses, broken down cars etc ). Being held back using the 2 second rule should afford you early vision beyond and around the car(s) your going to overtake to anticipate an opportunity. Moving up to the follow position when suitable is the next stage, whereby your going to be at the start of the process above. And of course, this should all be done seamlessly using acceleration sense based on what you observe.
Now it's coming over all scientific.Moving up to and retreating from a follow position ( or stretching the elastic ) is dependant on a sound awareness of where any options / hazards may lurk ( junctions, turnings, drives, vision losses, broken down cars etc ). Being held back using the 2 second rule should afford you early vision beyond and around the car(s) your going to overtake to anticipate an opportunity. Moving up to the follow position when suitable is the next stage, whereby your going to be at the start of the process above. And of course, this should all be done seamlessly using acceleration sense based on what you observe.
( It's an overtake).vonhosen said:
Red 5 said:
vonhosen said:
RobM77 said:
This is just down to an understanding of risk and probability. Sure, a percentage of other road users won’t bother to check for your signal. A percentage won’t have good enough eyesight. A percentage will see your signal, but ignore it. What’s left is the percentage of people who will benefit from your signal, and as long as that’s not zero, signalling is beneficial. The thing is, none of these percentages are known to you, so there is always the chance that the percentage of benefitting drivers is non-zero, so that’s why you always signal. Simple.
What about those it could mislead or may misinterpret it?As a general rule though, a signal that underlines a lane change for an overtake, is adding to the available visual information in a positive way
If we are making generalisations, people's position &/or speed is often a better/more reliable indication of people's intent than a bulb (illuminated or not).
That's not to say that bulbs can't be used thoughtfully & usefully (though are often misused thoughtlessly).
I prefer considered & thoughtful use rather than the absolutes of always or never used.
Dizeee said:
Even more shocking, In which case, you were taught incorrectly or a long, long time ago. What decade did you achieve these courses? They are certainly not advocated or taught now.
2006 standard driving course. 2013 Advanced driving course. When did you do your Police driving courses?focusxr5 said:
2006 standard driving course. 2013 Advanced driving course. When did you do your Police driving courses?
2006 Standard, 2009 Advanced, 2014 TPAC, refreshed twice in 2016 and then 2019 for my current role...Were you seriously taught to indicate on an Adv Course? Where was this - oop north?
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff