Not using an indicator has become the majority now?

[GrasB]

However, you cannot be certain the following driver is driving in careful and observant manner, so it is best to give them prior warning you are about to overtake. It may make them pay attention when they weren't before. It costs nothing more than a small flick of a finger or sticking an arm out, so unless a signal is ambiguous or actually going to cause danger or inconvenience to someone you might as well do it.

I never said don't indicate to overtake, only the reasons given are due to careless driving, which is absolutely true.

If everyone drove safely then indicators become potentially even more useful than they are at the moment, since at that point they can be relied on to indicate the actual intention of the road user rather than just the likelihood of their intention.

More useful, yes. Needed, no.

 

[moo]

Hard to tell if there's a lack of indicator usage. Most modern cars have indicators that can't be seen in daylight and blend in with the headlights at night

 

[Brandane]

Dinner party chat locally suggests use of left hand indicator on car usually results in following must-get-past nobber-driver executing overtake regardless and thus many now prefer to spring left turns on folk.

Why would this be a problem, assuming it is safe to carry out the overtake?
If someone is turning left, and it is clear to move out and pass the turning vehicle, then that is what should happen. Are you saying that the following vehicle should slow down, stay on the left lane of the road, and wait for the left turning vehicle to carry out it's manoeuvre before continuing? That is lazy driving and would result in at least a "minor" fault if done on a driving test, or possibly a serious fault (and therefore a fail) for failing to make reasonable progress.

 

[clockman]

How many people have an inability to use 'common sense' when driving or riding, period. Most of the niggles upsetting drivers about others driving/riding is generally caused by a combination of ignorance, impatience and incompetence, from both sides.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Why would this be a problem, assuming it is safe to carry out the overtake?
If someone is turning left, and it is clear to move out and pass the turning vehicle, then that is what should happen. Are you saying that the following vehicle should slow down, stay on the left lane of the road, and wait for the left turning vehicle to carry out it's manoeuvre before continuing? That is lazy driving and would result in at least a "minor" fault if done on a driving test, or possibly a serious fault (and therefore a fail) for failing to make reasonable progress.

Are you a driving examiner/instructor? Or an IAM member?

 

[Brandane]

Are you a driving examiner/instructor? Or an IAM member?

Ex Police driver, ex driving instructor. Please don't tell me that you (and your dinner party friends) think that the scenario you describe is good practice; I find that a worrying trend if so.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Ex Police driver, ex driving instructor. Please don't tell me that you (and your dinner party friends) think that the scenario you describe is good practice; I find that a worrying trend if so.

Hanging back from left turning vehicles in town, i.e. on non-rural SC roads, was being taught to motorcyclists as gospel by IAM instructors 30 and 25 and five years ago, and was still being taught to drivers ten years ago too. Maybe things have changed?

 

[Ganymede]

My father-in-law (now 85) has always said that at roundabout, you shouldn't signal at all. He say it "all happens automatically". We do not know who told him this, but he's been driving since about 1948.

 

[Brandane]

Hanging back from left turning vehicles in town, i.e. on non-rural SC roads, was being taught to motorcyclists as gospel by IAM instructors 30 and 25 and five years ago, and was still being taught to drivers ten years ago too. Maybe things have changed?

Admittedly I was picturing a more rural scenario (and I did qualify my reply with "assuming it is safe"); however, even in a busy town environment a following driver should be looking for a way to safely manoeuvre around a left turning vehicle rather than just robotically slow down or even stop if that is what the left turner has to do (as they don't know what is around the corner and might have to stop for pedestrians, parked vehicles etc.).
Assuming it is clear and safe to do so, a following vehicle should prepare to move out and possibly pass a left turning vehicle, rather than just sit behind it.
PS. ..... I am also an active motorcyclist with a licence since 1983, and a class 1 HGV licence holder for the past 10 years.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

Motorway slip roads seem to have developed a peculiar roll reversal, where the flashing light means "I'm ignoring the give way marker and pulling out what ever, so move or be rammed".

 

[GrasB]

Admittedly I was picturing a more rural scenario (and I did qualify my reply with "assuming it is safe"); however, even in a busy town environment a following driver should be looking for a way to safely manoeuvre around a left turning vehicle rather than just robotically slow down or even stop if that is what the left turner has to do (as they don't know what is around the corner and might have to stop for pedestrians, parked vehicles etc.).
Assuming it is clear and safe to do so, a following vehicle should prepare to move out and possibly pass a left turning vehicle, rather than just sit behind it.
PS. ..... I am also an active motorcyclist with a licence since 1983, and a class 1 HGV licence holder for the past 10 years.

There is a argument that one if close enough to commit to such an overtake one can't see clearly enough for such an overtake as you haven't got a proper view of the involved parties at the point of committing to such an overtake. If one is far enough back to see if it's clear at the point of commitment then the distances involved are such that you can't guarantee it will remain clear to do so by the time you'r ending the manoeuvre.

FYI I'm currently a RoSPA gold standard driver.

 

[Brandane]

There is a argument that one i close enough to commit to such an overtake one can't see clearly enough for such an overtake as you haven't got a proper view of the involved parties at the point of committing to such an overtake. If one is far enough back to see if it's clear at the point of commitment then the distances involved are such that you can't guarantee it will remain clear to do so by the time you'r ending the manoeuvre.

You can't really cover every scenario and possible hazards in a few paragraphs on an internet forum, which is why I just covered it as "assuming it is safe". If you haven't got a proper view, then you don't do it.

 

[GrasB]

You can't really cover every scenario and possible hazards in a few paragraphs on an internet forum, which is why I just covered it as "assuming it is safe". If you haven't got a proper view, then you don't do it.

The point is "assuming it is safe" covers a small minority of the situations due to the vehicle turning left being in your sight line. Yes I can know there's a vehicle there but at the point of no return in the overtake I do not have enough information to actually know what the driver in the side road is doing or going to do.

 

[GrasB]

[QUOTE 3189138, member: 45"]Rather than argue that we've all got the best rule, which causes confusion because it brings diversity when on the road, why not just follow the HC and indicate when overtaking as it tells you to.

Too many people trying to be cleverer on here.[/QUOTE]
I can only find people taking one sentence & extrapolating it to an, incorrect, conclusion.

 

[GrasB]

[QUOTE 3189161, member: 45"]What, in this thread or the HC rule that tells you to signal when overtaking and is accompanied by a picture of a car overtaking a bicycle with its indicator on?[/QUOTE]
I can't find any post suggesting you don't signal before an overtake!