Indicators should be banned, to improve road safety.

[Arfcollins]

The obvious example is when pedestrians decide whether or not to cross a side road. It gives them a decision point on whether to decide to wait or cross, it aids that process of negotiation we all use every day on the roads.

Largely, I'm also with Kestevan, I'm very untrusting of indicators on motor vehicles as they're too easily left indicating when the turn is long gone. I'd be a little bit more trusting of a cyclist indicating since it takes positive effort to indicate on a bicycle.

They have some use in a case like that, but the better and more reliable aid is the distance of the car and it's assumed speed. Most people are pretty good at doing that mental calculation very quickly and unconciously. I stress the 'assumed' because that mental calculation is usually based on a quick glance at the vehicle and a general awareness of the road type, eg suburban etc to decide it's speed. It is the reason that I believe it is unforgivable to speed on roads that might contain pedestrians - but that's another topic!
And yes, I too would trust an indicating cyclist.

 

[ferret fur]

OK, but I think you are looking only from the viewpoint of the person indicating who, afterall, is the only one who knows what is going to happen. The road-users around him have to make their best guess of this, based on his speed, direction and indicators.
In my local roundabout example it takes less than 3 seconds at 40mph for a car to pass across one exit and on to the one they are taking, about 50 yards. If you were a cyclist watching that car indicating left would you assume it was safe to pull out? Maybe you do, but I don't. And as I do not believe the indicating it is therefore useless and has as much value as no indicating.
In my other example the left fork is about 10 yards on from the sharp left. The only correct indicating would be to do it immediately after the sharp left, which at 40 mph is about half a second before turning. That would be one flash. Who would benefit from this?

Yeah but.. that still doesn't meant that helping people to understand your intentions has no value. You keep giving examples where people indicate incorrectly or where the 'correct' indication may be impossible. Doesn't mean that you can't indicate correctly when it is appropriate. I don't drive behind someone & assume that their brake lights necessarily work. Does that mean we should take brakelights off cars as well? Things can be useful even if you should not rely on them 100%.

 

[Boris Bajic]

....

Largely, I'm also with Kestevan, I'm very untrusting of indicators on motor vehicles as they're too easily left indicating when the turn is long gone. I'd be a little bit more trusting of a cyclist indicating since it takes positive effort to indicate on a bicycle.

Modern indicators can be left on after a lane change or similar, as the wheel is barely turned, but not if the wheel is turned far enough to activate the self-cancel. However, more and more cars today have a system not unlike the older self-cancellers on motorcycles, where a quick flick results in only four flashes or so. It may be that some drivers are too unspeakably dull to understand how they work, but they should largely solve that problem.

In my youth I drove FX4s (not as an LTDA driver!) and older Citroens, both of whose indicators were non-self-cancelling. Citroen were convinced it was a safety issue. They believed that the driver should decide both when to activate and when to de-activate the turn signal.

I agree with them on that. The design department at Citroen were madder than a box of frogs, but they wewre also usually right. They only started to fit self-cancelling indicators (2nd-generation BX?) when market resistance to the dash-top rocker switch was clearly costing them sales.

Market resistance is a bastard and (in collusion with fiscal reality and a shortage of certifiable engineers) it sucked the very soul out of Citroen.

Having made that point, I do accept that rare is the day when I accidentally continue to indicate for a mile or so on a bicycle....

 

[Arfcollins]

Yeah but.. that still doesn't meant that helping people to understand your intentions has no value. You keep giving examples where people indicate incorrectly or where the 'correct' indication may be impossible. Doesn't mean that you can't indicate correctly when it is appropriate. I don't drive behind someone & assume that their brake lights necessarily work. Does that mean we should take brakelights off cars as well? Things can be useful even if you should not rely on them 100%.

No I wouldn't suggest we take brakelights off too. Please only use a small hammer to smash the indicators - I wouldn't want any collateral damage to the brakelights. Even stupid and unobservant drivers can use them correctly, and they tell what is actually happening - not what might or might not happen.

In the examples I've given would you agree that that the indicating would be the least reliable piece of information available and that placing any credence in it could cause an accident?

 

[BentMikey]

Here's a good example of why not to indicate left with an oncoming right turning car:


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNa7XRTfxfI&feature=colike

 

[Recycler]

I'm sure that far more accidents are prevented by the correct use of indicators than are caused by their incorrect use. It's a no-brainer.

It's wise to assume that an indicator is simply an indication of what might happen but it would be chaos if people stopped using the things.

 

[byegad]

Indicators on other road users are useful to inform me of their intentions. If I'm sat waiting to turn out and a car approaches with his left indicator flashing I wait until I see him brake and start to turn in. The moment he does I'm ready to go. If the pillock doesn't indicate I'm not ready to go. Saying that indicating is useless or worse dangerous is a simplistic statement that is in itself dangerous, as it will encourage bad drivers to be worse drivers.

 

[boydj]

BM's example above is why Cyclecraft distinguishes between 'courtesy' signals, such as indicating a left turn to a vehicle waiting to exit a side-street, and 'safety'' signals, such as making a right turn with traffic coming from behind. Personally, I only ever signal left if the only other vehicle present is the one waiting to exit the road I'm about to turn into - or possibly on a busy roundabout, for safety reasons.

 

[CotterPin]

The Bikeability scheme is all about communicating with other road users. Signalling is one way of doing this. As others have mentioned, the scheme trains cyclists to indicate only when there is someone to indicate to. It is very often combined with gaining eye contact with the other road user so you are actually having a one-to-one conversation with that person. If there is nobody around then you are talking to yourself! The key outcome from the training is not the signalling but the looking and then making a decision whether to signal or not based upon what you have seen.

 

[doug]

OK, but I think you are looking only from the viewpoint of the person indicating who, afterall, is the only one who knows what is going to happen. The road-users around him have to make their best guess of this, based on his speed, direction and indicators.
In my local roundabout example it takes less than 3 seconds at 40mph for a car to pass across one exit and on to the one they are taking, about 50 yards. If you were a cyclist watching that car indicating left would you assume it was safe to pull out? Maybe you do, but I don't. And as I do not believe the indicating it is therefore useless and has as much value as no indicating.
In my other example the left fork is about 10 yards on from the sharp left. The only correct indicating would be to do it immediately after the sharp left, which at 40 mph is about half a second before turning. That would be one flash. Who would benefit from this?

For your first example on the roundabout, it would depend on the situation (distance and speed), if they indicated I would prepare to pull out, but wait until they confirmed this by changing direction. If they didn't indicate, I'd assume the weren't taking that exit, I wouldn't prepare to pull out and then curse them under my breath for being discourteous and wasting my time.

As for the second one, now you bring in the extra detail that they are approaching at 40mph, it is quite possible that in such an instance an indication may not be very useful, but it doesn't cause confusion and may help someone, so why not do it ?

Indication is a courtesy and when it is safe to do so we should be courteous on the road.

 

[Arfcollins]

For your first example on the roundabout, it would depend on the situation (distance and speed), if they indicated I would prepare to pull out, but wait until they confirmed this by changing direction. If they didn't indicate, I'd assume the weren't taking that exit, I wouldn't prepare to pull out and then curse them under my breath for being discourteous and wasting my time.

I gave the distance and speed and also that it takes less than 3 seconds from indicating to turning off. So the time that has been wasted by ignoring the indication is a maximum of 3 seconds, plus the second or two it takes to accelerate onto the roundabout.

As for the second one, now you bring in the extra detail that they are approaching at 40mph, it is quite possible that in such an instance an indication may not be very useful, but it doesn't cause confusion and may help someone, so why not do it ?

The extra detail doesn't significantly change the scenario. One indicator flash at 40 mph would be one and a bit flashes at 30 mph. I'm not sure how seeing this could help someone, but I'm willing to listen if you can explain.

Indication is a courtesy and when it is safe to do so we should be courteous on the road.

I disagree, as you'd expect. Behaviour on the roads should be strictly analytical, there is no place for such fluff.

 

[doug]

I gave the distance and speed and also that it takes less than 3 seconds from indicating to turning off. So the time that has been wasted by ignoring the indication is a maximum of 3 seconds, plus the second or two it takes to accelerate onto the roundabout.

For one vehicle that is not a huge loss only a minor irritaion, but if there is a stream of traffic, they may have missed their only chance to enter the roundabout for a lot longer than 3 or 5 seconds. Missing that opportunity may result in frustration and possibly excessive risk taking in order to get onto the roundabout, correct indication could have avoided this.

The extra detail doesn't significantly change the scenario. One indicator flash at 40 mph would be one and a bit flashes at 30 mph. I'm not sure how seeing this could help someone, but I'm willing to listen if you can explain.

Again, if there is only one vehicle it is probably not a big issue, but in heavy traffic the person further along the road waiting to cross has missed their opportunity. It is quite possible to construct scenarios where it doesn't matter if you indicate or not, but in my experience I'd rather people did indicate (correctly) as it reduces frustration and makes travelling on our roads more pleasant.

I disagree, as you'd expect. Behaviour on the roads should be strictly analytical, there is no place for such fluff.

I feel such "fluff" reduces frustration and aggression, encourages courtesy in others and can make the roads more pleasant. Of course it should be secondary to proper observation and following the other rules of the roads, but I still feel it can be useful part of road safety in the majority of situations I see on the roads.

 

[Arfcollins]

Doug, I appreciate your full and patient replies, but it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I'll continue to keep my indicating to a minimum and ignore other's in certain situations. I suspect we both actually behave in a similar way, but come to it from opposite viewpoints.

 

[PBB]

Good points. Recently, I've been mulling over the issue of left turn indicating on a bike (or rather right turn indicating, but I'm in the US, so that translates to left for most of you folks). I'm leaning towards the conclusion that it's best never to indicate such a turn, as it can only encourage drivers to try to share the turn with you, which is never a good idea (at least not for the cyclist). Making them think I'm going straight is always a better policy, I reckon.

I agree -as from tomorrow will not be indicating left when I turn left, at least at a certain junction where yesterday and today the turning was shared with me, today literally inches from me.

 

[Ian Cooper]

I agree -as from tomorrow will not be indicating left when I turn left, at least at a certain junction where yesterday and today the turning was shared with me, today literally inches from me.

I find an Airzound appropriately startles the morons in situations like these.