Frank exchange of words with black cabbie New Topic Reply to Topic

sothach wrote:
P wrote:
(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)

OK, I'm not IAM (spit!), but RoSPA motorcycle trained, but the thing
about not indicating when moving back into the left-hand lane is
qualified by the proviso that you indicating won't help warn another
road user of your upcoming action - in this case it obviously would
have.

When it becomes a judgement call then it all falls to pieces. Some
people have a strange definition of "obvious".

Getting people to indicate is one thing, getting them to indicate
before starting the maneuver is a whole different kettle of fish.

-Alex

Alex wrote on 03/08/2006 11:29 +0100:

Getting people to indicate is one thing, getting them to indicate
before starting the maneuver is a whole different kettle of fish.


I believe the modern teaching fashion is "manoeuvre, look*, signal*"

* optional

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

"spindrift" wrote in message
oups.com...
North-bound, London Bridge, three lanes, I'm in the left hand lane,
he's in the middle.


Tale of woe snipped.

If you had taken his taxi plate number and called the licensing authority
saying his taxi was defective (not showing a brake light and non functioning
indicator) he would have been called in for a check -- which might have
taken an hour or so of his time.

:~)

Tony Raven wrote:
P wrote on 03/08/2006 09:00 +0100:

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)


Can't agree with that. What is the problem with giving a signal? Worst
case is it's no use, best case it might help inform someone of your
intended actions. So there is no downside, only upside giving a median
of positive benefit and therefore worth doing.

Using a signal when there is noone to benefit from it is a sign that
the driver isn't aware of what is going on around them.

Sometimes it's not possible to tell whether anyone would benefit from
your signal - e.g. approaching a crossroads when you can't yet see if
there is anyone coming the other way. In that instance I would say
"giving a signal for a vehicle as yet unseen".

With advanced driving you should be able to justify everything you do.
So if you want to change lane, you will first have checked before
starting to signal. So if you do signal and there is absolutely nobody
around to see it then what are you going to say to the question "why
did you signal?"

This is a bit like using the mirrors on the driving test. You
deliberately move your head so that the instructor knows you are doing
it. On an advanced driving test you don't need to do that because your
actions will change depending on what is happening behind you anyway.

Always signalling without thought is as bad as never signalling. How
often have you been waiting to cross a road when a car is coming up
with it's indicator going only to have the car drive past the road you
want to cross and pull up.

Every time you use a signal you must say "Who is going to benefit from
this signal?" and "Who is going to be confused by this signal?". If you
haven't got time to answer those questions they you are going too fast
for the conditions.

Tim.

said the following on 03/08/2006 12:24:

Always signalling without thought is as bad as never signalling. How
often have you been waiting to cross a road when a car is coming up
with it's indicator going only to have the car drive past the road you
want to cross and pull up.

A car driver who does that is correct to do so. I was always taught to
not assume that just because someone is indicating left it means they're
going left, and that in fact they might be doing just as you describe.
If they're pulling up just beyond the junction, to wait until they're
clear of the junction before indicating might be too late.

Would you pull out of a side road on front of a car indicating left? I
certainly wouldn't until I was sure that that really was the intention.
Isn't that what's taught? I think the way I remembered it was
something like "Would you trust your life to a flashing orange light?"

For the on pedants here, I've used "left" purely as an illustration, and
the term "right" could also be used.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Tony Raven said the following on 03/08/2006 11:41:

I believe the modern teaching fashion is "manoeuvre, look*, signal*"

....and if the indicator flashes more than once, that's a failure :-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
P wrote on 03/08/2006 09:00 +0100:

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police
class 1 driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving
into a left-hand lane, and the above was his explanation.)


Can't agree with that. What is the problem with giving a signal?
Worst case is it's no use, best case it might help inform someone of
your intended actions. So there is no downside, only upside giving
a median of positive benefit and therefore worth doing.

Using a signal when there is noone to benefit from it is a sign that
the driver isn't aware of what is going on around them.

Unless the road is clear, how do you make the judgement that no one would
benefit?

Smacks of "I'm such a good driver, I don't need to indicate" to me...

Tony W wrote:

If you had taken his taxi plate number and called the licensing authority
saying his taxi was defective (not showing a brake light and non functioning
indicator) he would have been called in for a check -- which might have
taken an hour or so of his time.

Classic Top Tip from Viz: "Taxi Drivers, take your cab to a garage and
get them to mend the indicators so other road users will know where the
f*ck you are going."

--
Dave...

Paul Boyd wrote:
Would you pull out of a side road on front of a car indicating left?

Yup, I did that on Tuesday. I was really angry with myself afterwards.
Fortunately the car was going slow and probably didn't even need to
brake, but what an idiotic thing to do!

On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, P wrote:
spindrift wrote:
"Gimme a chance mate, use your indicators!"


"I don't need to indicate"

he said

And he's correct. He's wrong to force you to brake, of course - that's bad
observation / bad driving by him - but if he was given a clear lane (yes, I
know he didn't get one, because you were in it), then he doesn't need to
indicate. The rule of the road is to keep left. If a driver is in an
overtaking lane, he should move back to the left hand land when safe.

Which is a load of ********.

It's like saying, he doesn't need to indicate left when he's getting
out of bed in the morning. Totally true. Totally irrelevant.
Totally, therefore, ******** to make the comment in this context.

It's irrelevant whether he has to indicate or not in some other
fictional situation you've just decided to make up. In the situation
of changing lanes with other traffic that must take account of your
intentions, it is necessary to indicate. More to the point, he should
have indicated, and should not have made the manoeuvre (if my
understanding of the account is correct).

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|