Indicators should be banned, to improve road safety.

[atbman]

I've pretty much always signalled, car or bike, regardless. It doesn't cost me anything and, if I haven't noticed someone, gives them suitable warning.

As for not signalling left, it seems to me that if there's someone waitning to come out of the road you're turning into, you give them the opportunity to pull out while you'r still approaching the turn-off. Courtesy, really.

 

[Brandane]

Are you an driving expert then? I'd rather listen to those thank you.

Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "driving expert". Some people might think they are, but I am not one of them. I make mistakes, same as EVERYBODY else. I have had a few accidents over the years that have been my fault. What I DO have is experience (on bicycles, motorbikes, cars, and HGVs of all classes). You don't need to be a "driving expert" to know when indicators should or should not be used.

 

[BentMikey]

The point is that if you're not absolutely certain whether there's someone around to signal to, then DON'T 'KING MANOEUVRE!!!!

 

[400bhp]

Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as a "driving expert". Some people might think they are, but I am not one of them. I make mistakes, same as EVERYBODY else. I have had a few accidents over the years that have been my fault. What I DO have is experience (on bicycles, motorbikes, cars, and HGVs of all classes). You don't need to be a "driving expert" to know when indicators should or should not be used.

:sigh:

 

[doug]

I tried the "not indicating unless you can see there is someone who will benefit" thing a while ago and although it is a good exercise to force you into taking a good look at every junction, after a while I came to the conclusion that it was very rare that I could be 100% certain I had observed absolutely everything (is there someone in that parked car you can't see due to the dark tinted windows, is there someone about to step out from behind that hedge?) and therefore had to indicate at every junction anyway. I came to the conclusion it was much better to indicate by default as this is at least a failsafe option. I still make sure I observe correctly and rather than asking myself "is there anyone who will benefit ?" I instead ask myself "is there anyone who I may confuse by indicating here?".

One thing I hate more than no indicators is someone indicating wrongly or confusingly, I sometime hear myself muttering under my breath "Oh you meant the 2nd left - not the first left !"

Far too many people do not indicate even when there is someone who will benefit, that I'd rather they indicated correctly and automatically than not at all

 

[gambatte]

From the point of view of the observer as opposed to the indicator, I always see indicators as just that. An indication that a driver 'may' be preparing to turn or change position. To be taken into consideration with other factors, slowing, visible driver observations etc.
I can't count the number of times I've followed a driver along a straight, clear road when they've had their indicator on for no apparant reason. Done it myself, usually after I've had to reapply them after they've knocked off too soon.
As to no indicators..... I reckon Cavendish can think of one Ferrari he wishes had them!

 

[doug]

The point is that if you're not absolutely certain whether there's someone around to signal to, then DON'T 'KING MANOEUVRE!!!!

I disagree - I don't think you can ever be 100% certain there is no one around to signal to, if you had to be 100% certain no one could ever move anywhere !
However, you can be sufficiently certain that you can stop in the distance that you have observed to be clear, and can react in time to anything you can reasonably expect.

 

[GrasB]

There is no evidence to support your assumption in Reiver's post.

Which assumption? The fact the driver is on a single-lane carriageway or that they're on a multi-lane carriageway? Both situational assumptions are clearly covered with the requisite qualifications.

 

[BentMikey]

I suspect that if you can't be so close to 100% certain as makes no difference that there are no road users around to be impacted by your manoeuvre, then you probably haven't looked properly and/or are going too fast for the situation.

 

[GrasB]

As to no indicators..... I reckon Cavendish can think of one Ferrari he wishes had them!

Racing, both pedal powered & engine powered requires trust between you & your competitors. To race closely you're in an zone where you can't react to every possible manoeuvre your competitors are capable of. This is where the concept of 'racing room' comes in, space that allows your competitor space to avoid an incident, but not necessarily the space to pass you.

 

[byegad]

or just polite, considerate road users.

Absolutely! It drives me mad when you wait to cross traffic and the complete buffoon stops or turns off without signalling before they reach you.

 

[doug]

I suspect that if you can't be so close to 100% certain as makes no difference that there are no road users around to be impacted by your manoeuvre, then you probably haven't looked properly and/or are going too fast for the situation.

I don't believe it is possible to be "so close to 100% certain as makes no difference" without having xray vision or ESP. The problem is not the people you can see, it is the people you can't - so I made the judgement to always indicate (unless there is a good reason not to) as there is always the slight possibility that there is someone I couldn't possibly have seen that may be impacted by my manoeuvre - and to travel at a speed where I can avoid any probable situation that may arise.

I also don't believe that anyone is capable of being completely observant all the time, so therefore think that indicating should be the default option.

 

[Mushroomgodmat]

I suspect that if you can't be so close to 100% certain as makes no difference that there are no road users around to be impacted by your manoeuvre, then you probably haven't looked properly and/or are going too fast for the situation.

I notice you said "probably" in "you probably haven't looked properly"... Which to me is a good enough reason to indicate just in case you missed something when looking properly.

 

[BentMikey]

Actually, no, I'm allowing for the possibility of missing someone who is far enough away that the indication is only useful but not necessary.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Why don't you explain to us all why several high profile road/cycle craft schemes teach to only indicate if someone would benefit?

 

[Mushroomgodmat]

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Why don't you explain to us all why several high profile road/cycle craft schemes teach to only indicate if someone would benefit?

I genuinely have no idea, I cannot think of a single reason where not indicating would ever make more sense than to indicate. Speaking personally (maybe other people a different in their telepathic abilities) but I think someone would have to be very foolish or dangerously arrogant to assume that he/she has seen everyone who might suddenly appear, or assume that because you cannot see then they cannot see you. And its in those situations that I indicate.

and in addition.... its still the part of the highway code (surly trumps every other scheme) to Signal, mirror, maneuver.