If they don't signal when they should, they have failed to observe correctly. A driver following the Roadcraft advice to the full wouldn't make that mistake.
The advice is only to signal when another road user will benefit from the signal. It should be obvious that implies that, if there is any doubt, then a signal should be given.
More than half a century of driving without any accident in which I was held in any way to blame. (Not no accidents, as somebody did drive into me when I had been stopped in a queue of traffic for a while. He admitted that he had been distracted and that it was entirely his fault.)
Completely confident. Following the Roadcraft principles, I only fail to signal as a conscious decision made when I am certain that no other road user will benefit from my signal. That means I signal more often than not and usually only don't signal if there is no other traffic around.
That?s wrong with the exactly. There are plenty who will be able to see your indication who are not even capable of being run into or doing something stupid that you will need to avoid, and those are harder to identify than the ones who you can run into or who can do something stupid that you need to avoid, because they are further away from where you will be going, by definition.
But checking for who it might be useful for is extra effort which must distract you from what matters, who you can hit and who can do sonneting stupid that you need to avoid.
Yeah, I got the same result. Stopped at a pedestrian crossing, could see that the taxi driver was oggling some bimbo in a micro miniskirt on the footpath in the 60s, ran right into the back of my beetle.
I would expect anybody who buys Roadcraft in order to be guided by it to fall into the category of those who aspire to become expert drivers. So I see no problem in it counselling perfection.
....
Not the wording in my copy, but I suppose in the decades since that was published they have found a need to refine the advice to suit people who didn't go through training at Hendon. The one I have is an early edition which, apart from lacking the section on the proper use of bell and lights, is virtually unchanged from the original White Paper that actually was used as a manual there.
...
The largest single factor in road traffic accidents is people not looking properly. Checking to be sure that your signal is actually necessary is one step in the process of trying to avoid that error.
There are some people who think that that extra "confidence check" over the shoulder isn't necessary. I think the reasoning is like this: "if I always indicate, then if the other driver knows what I'm about to do he'll warn me with his horn if I'm about to do something stupid like pulling out into his path, so I know not to do it".
There's no harm in this as an extra safeguard (you can never have too many safety checks) but ideally you should look to make sure you are not about to cause an accident, rather than relying on the other person to warn you once they know of your intentions.
The difficulty comes because some people indicate what they would *like* to do, giving other road users advance warning, whereas other people use the indicator to say "the instant my light flashes, this is what I am doing right now". It can cause problems when you want to change lane on a motorway. If there is a long stream of traffic in the lane I want to join, I will indicate my intention *when it is safe*, in the hope that someone might slow down slightly to let me out ahead of them. But other drivers see my signal and assume that I'm going to pull out right now, so they give me a warning hoot.
It is difficult to know which to do for the best: if there is no chance right now of pulling out, should I indicate anyway and hope that someone will let me out, or should I wait (and wait, and wait) until I see a gap and then indicate and pull out? (*)
(*) It's the equivalent of the "ding ding and away" type of railway accident where a guard gives the "train ready to depart" bell signal to the driver, and the driver interprets this as clearance to set off even though his signal may still be at red. Should the guard give the bell code as soon as all the doors are closed etc, or should he check the signal himself and hold off until it turns green - two sets of eyes (driver's and guard's) being better than one?
It actually means don't use signals if they will cause confusion.
There is no harm in signalling if the signal is clear even if there is nobody to see it.
I never indicate to pull back in on the motorway unless we have an idiot like turnip behind who thinks he should undertake before you have got the required distance in front of the vehicle you have just passed to pull in. They just assume you are lane hogging if you leave a cars length before pulling in.
Well yes. That's true almost by necessity, as even with the fastest reactions imaginable and travelling at only 2mph a driver would still drive into a brick wall if his or her attention was otherwise engaged say in navigating a touch screen on a central console.
I'm sorry but that's simply a re-iteration of what you appeared to be claiming previously. That discretionary signalling is a good idea because it gets drivers into the habit of looking around them - the clear implication being that they might not do so otherwise.
And in any case the comparion being made is between accidents caused by drivers who don't signal when they should do, which would be eliminated should signalling become habitual, and accidents caused by habitual signallers.
Nobody would dispute that skilled drivers using discretionary signalling most likely have far fewer accidents than either of the above, but your can't formuate recommendations on the assumption that ordinary people are ever going to become highly skilled at any activity
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.