Overtaking

[crr003]

But these 'killer roads' do exist. I was on one on the way home last night, so I drove as fast as I could to minimise my exposure to risk on it........

But you can get really cheap insurance now - so that's OK then (well, £10 cheaper anyway....)

[crr003]

Overtakes 2 to 7 – A59 between Samlesbury and Gisburn.

A bit off topic, but still overtaking related.....
Few weeks ago I was following a Volvo S60 (?) on Police driver training down this road (and keeping up with it well, if I may say so!).
The driver was doing all the positioning stuff and kept going out to look for overtakes.
My travelling companion (female) said something like "what's he up to? He's all over the road...." I then gave her a brief description of what he was trying to achieve (having not only read Roadcraft, but having also seen the video........).
Her reply - "well, he can't be that good, he hasn't indicated once..."

[Lady Godiva]

ie I have sufficient vision to ("can") see there are no junctions there so it's safe (a positive view of your vision), rather than I "can't" see a junction so it's safe (a negative view).
.......
If you can't see there isn't a junction (there are places for one to be hidden), hold back & wait for a better opportunity where you can see there isn't one.

Would you factor in some kind or probability to a vehicle being present, or 100% decide not to overtake; say you can see an open field gate set back in a hedge row. No activity in the field you can see; no mud on the road to indicate the field's being used. Would you teach to not overtake?
If you could see the gate was closed, would you teach to overtake?

If you can see nothing is there fine, if you can't say it isn't there, wait.

Just as you are at greatest danger from the vehicle towards you haven't seen, so it is with the junction you haven't seen or haven't had sufficient vision into.
When you do an overtake towards a loss of vision you should anticipate a quick quick vehicle towards in your planning. If you see a junction but don't have sufficient depth of vision to see it's clear you should expect the vehicle is there, will pull out & won't look for you.

The fact a junction is seen doesn't mean that an overtake is automatically not on. It's can you do the overtake safely if that unknown happens. If you've sufficient time & space to do it all without the junction or anything in it becoming a problem, then it's fine.

Missing some overtakes you could have done, is preferable to doing one you shouldn't have. You have to live first in order to fight another day.

I am cautious where dense vegetation close to the roadway & poor lateral vision are concerned. So many concealed entrances out there & just one mistake can be enough for tragedy.

Dear Mr Vonhosen - it's good to hear your comments on this, as it tends to re-inforce my understanding of what i should be trying to do. I've travelled with some drivers regarded as advanced, and they seem to take a chance. There is an offside junction, but they take the overtake as it is 'unlikely' that anything will come out!!!

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if there is a junction with no vision, that could be hiding a road user that could adversely affect the overtake, then don't do it. A couple of questions spring to mind:

1) I assume all the above advice applies to junctions on both sides, nearside and offside.

2) what would you do if there was a junction with no vision, and you could get back in before the junction after doing the overtake IF a car/bike emerged doing the speed limit, but NOT if a car/bike emerged but did massively over the speed limit. Sometimes I will see a junction, I can't see into it, and I think that a motorbike could come out towards me, and based on the often seen behaviour (of some) of massively exceeding the speed limit, we would clash. I tend to hold back in this case, as the driving plan says base it on what you can reasonably expect to happen. But I know that those behind are thinking 'go girl, Go'. Am I correct in holding back (assuming safety is the main priority) or am I not understanding what I should be doing.

Your comments would be very much appreciated.

Regards
Sally (should be slaving over a hot stove) Johnson
x

[nuster100]

I would think that you need to plan for the worst case scenario.

I would be planning for a car overshooting the stop line at the junction. If I couldn't avoid that, then I wouldn't overtake.

Also worth bearing in mind that some people don't like being overtaken. They tend to feel that if they wouldn't do it, then no-one should. So in your plan, you should consider the *possibility* that the vehicle you are trying to overtake may speed up. Therefore you need to either allow for extra room or prepare to abort.

Jay

[waremark]

A couple of questions spring to mind:

1) I assume all the above advice applies to junctions on both sides, nearside and offside.

2) what would you do if there was a junction with no vision, and you could get back in before the junction after doing the overtake IF a car/bike emerged doing the speed limit, but NOT if a car/bike emerged but did massively over the speed limit.

Hi Sally, I know you addressed this to VH, but I feel sufficiently confident to reply.

Re point 1, yes certainly you should consider junctions (or entrances) on both sides. And I like very much VH's point that for the overtake to be on you have to be able to see that there is no junction or entrance, not only not be able to see that there is one.

And re point 2, you have to be ready for anything which might reasonably be expected to happen. This could certainly include a vehicle towards exceeding the speed limit, but actually that is fairly unlikely if you are considering a vehicle which has to make a sharp turn out of a junction to join your road (it is generally more relevant in relation to traffic towards you over a brow or round a bend). But it is really really difficult to assess how far towards you a fast vehicle turning out of the junction might get, and of course you are right that if in doubt you hold back.

[vonhosen]

Dear Mr Vonhosen - it's good to hear your comments on this, as it tends to re-inforce my understanding of what i should be trying to do. I've travelled with some drivers regarded as advanced, and they seem to take a chance. There is an offside junction, but they take the overtake as it is 'unlikely' that anything will come out!!!

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if there is a junction with no vision, that could be hiding a road user that could adversely affect the overtake, then don't do it. A couple of questions spring to mind:

1) I assume all the above advice applies to junctions on both sides, nearside and offside.

2) what would you do if there was a junction with no vision, and you could get back in before the junction after doing the overtake IF a car/bike emerged doing the speed limit, but NOT if a car/bike emerged but did massively over the speed limit. Sometimes I will see a junction, I can't see into it, and I think that a motorbike could come out towards me, and based on the often seen behaviour (of some) of massively exceeding the speed limit, we would clash. I tend to hold back in this case, as the driving plan says base it on what you can reasonably expect to happen. But I know that those behind are thinking 'go girl, Go'. Am I correct in holding back (assuming safety is the main priority) or am I not understanding what I should be doing.

Your comments would be very much appreciated.

Regards
Sally (should be slaving over a hot stove) Johnson
x

Hello Sally

1) Yes both sides, but offside is where conflict tends to be most prevalent.

2) Yes again, forget about speed limits, consider something going as quick as it could there (sports bike quick).


It's a similar thing towards losses of vision.
As a simple rule you should be able to complete the overtake & be back on your side 'within' half the distance to the loss of vision at the point you start. This of course works on the premise of something the same speed as you coming towards.
You need to go on from that though & look at the loss of vision (perhaps bend) itself & how fast something could come out of it.
If it's a 90 degree bend you are doing it towards, you may be able to go beyond the half way point (depending on your speed because anything out of it would be slower than you).
If it's towards a fairly open bend on a fast 'A' road, you may have to be able to complete well before half way because anything towards could be going quicker than you.

Don't feel forced. If you aren't happy you don't go.

[TripleS]

ie I have sufficient vision to ("can") see there are no junctions there so it's safe (a positive view of your vision), rather than I "can't" see a junction so it's safe (a negative view).
.......
If you can't see there isn't a junction (there are places for one to be hidden), hold back & wait for a better opportunity where you can see there isn't one.

Would you factor in some kind or probability to a vehicle being present, or 100% decide not to overtake; say you can see an open field gate set back in a hedge row. No activity in the field you can see; no mud on the road to indicate the field's being used. Would you teach to not overtake?
If you could see the gate was closed, would you teach to overtake?

If you can see nothing is there fine, if you can't say it isn't there, wait.

Just as you are at greatest danger from the vehicle towards you haven't seen, so it is with the junction you haven't seen or haven't had sufficient vision into.
When you do an overtake towards a loss of vision you should anticipate a quick quick vehicle towards in your planning. If you see a junction but don't have sufficient depth of vision to see it's clear you should expect the vehicle is there, will pull out & won't look for you.

The fact a junction is seen doesn't mean that an overtake is automatically not on. It's can you do the overtake safely if that unknown happens. If you've sufficient time & space to do it all without the junction or anything in it becoming a problem, then it's fine.

Missing some overtakes you could have done, is preferable to doing one you shouldn't have. You have to live first in order to fight another day.

I am cautious where dense vegetation close to the roadway & poor lateral vision are concerned. So many concealed entrances out there & just one mistake can be enough for tragedy.

Dear Mr Vonhosen - it's good to hear your comments on this, as it tends to re-inforce my understanding of what i should be trying to do. I've travelled with some drivers regarded as advanced, and they seem to take a chance. There is an offside junction, but they take the overtake as it is 'unlikely' that anything will come out!!!

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if there is a junction with no vision, that could be hiding a road user that could adversely affect the overtake, then don't do it. A couple of questions spring to mind:

1) I assume all the above advice applies to junctions on both sides, nearside and offside.

2) what would you do if there was a junction with no vision, and you could get back in before the junction after doing the overtake IF a car/bike emerged doing the speed limit, but NOT if a car/bike emerged but did massively over the speed limit. Sometimes I will see a junction, I can't see into it, and I think that a motorbike could come out towards me, and based on the often seen behaviour (of some) of massively exceeding the speed limit, we would clash. I tend to hold back in this case, as the driving plan says base it on what you can reasonably expect to happen. But I know that those behind are thinking 'go girl, Go'. Am I correct in holding back (assuming safety is the main priority) or am I not understanding what I should be doing.

Your comments would be very much appreciated.

Regards
Sally (should be slaving over a hot stove) Johnson
x

I'm glad to note that you now know your place, but you still might like to take a little time off now and again and try a bit of advanced driving. You may get to like that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Lady Godiva]

Your comments would be very much appreciated.

Regards
Sally (should be slaving over a hot stove) Johnson
x

I'm glad to note that you now know your place, but you still might like to take a little time off now and again and try a bit of advanced driving. You may get to like that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Dear Dave

I am now considering becoming an Observer.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

Regards
Sally

[TripleS]

Your comments would be very much appreciated.

Regards
Sally (should be slaving over a hot stove) Johnson
x

I'm glad to note that you now know your place, but you still might like to take a little time off now and again and try a bit of advanced driving. You may get to like that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Dear Dave

I am now considering becoming an Observer.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

Regards
Sally

Oh I am, petrified.

I think I can help you there, if only in terms of how not to treat an Associate, although IIRC it was James Allport who offered some very good thoughts on that subject; anyhow I wish you every success with your initiative.

Would you like to practice on me - just to see how difficult this observing lark can be?

<Reminds self that the last time I made advances to Sally I got the big E very promptly.>

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[martine]

I am now considering becoming an Observer.

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

Regards
Sally

Oh go for it...it's enjoyable but time consuming. Where's your local group?

[crr003]

I've travelled with some drivers regarded as advanced, and they seem to take a chance. There is an offside junction, but they take the overtake as it is 'unlikely' that anything will come out!!!

Well you better show them this thread then! Maybe they saw the junction was clear?

Anyway, good luck with the Observing.