Lack Confidence with overtaking

[vonhosen]

I've always felt that the IAM and RoADAR could do much to help with overtaking. My suggestion was to go out in pairs - two associates in their own cars, each with an observer with a two-way radio so the two cars can communicate and co-operate. Then, by using appropriate local roads, they can practice over-taking (and being overtaken).

Actually this is a good idea. I have been part of training that took place in pairs of vehicles, which was a good chance for practicing proper overtaking, as well as other things that a pair of drivers can do to reduce hazards (like "protected lane changes").

The more time spent where you can safely get the best view the better (for me anyway).

[jcochrane]

I've always felt that the IAM and RoADAR could do much to help with overtaking. My suggestion was to go out in pairs - two associates in their own cars, each with an observer with a two-way radio so the two cars can communicate and co-operate. Then, by using appropriate local roads, they can practice over-taking (and being overtaken).

Actually this is a good idea. I have been part of training that took place in pairs of vehicles, which was a good chance for practicing proper overtaking, as well as other things that a pair of drivers can do to reduce hazards (like "protected lane changes").

The more time spent where you can safely get the best view the better (for me anyway).

My thoughts as well von.

[GJD]

Indeed I edited the message. My point is that moving all the way over to the near lane is unnecessary (in most cases, not in all of them...). The less time and space in the opposite lane, the better.

I find that an overtake that can be completely assessed, planned and committed to from within my own lane is the exception rather than the rule. I find that for most overtakes I commit from the opposite lane (or at least partly across the centre line) - which means that I have moved into the opposite lane before I have decided whether I am going to overtake or not - which, in turn, means that I sometimes move into the opposite lane, decide that I'm not going to overtake, and move back into my lane still behind the vehicle I'm looking to pass. And I find that if I move into the opposite lane when I think there might be a possible opportunity coming, when it turns out that it is an opportunity I often see it earlier, which means that I sometimes make overtakes that I wouldn't have made if I'd stayed in my own lane to assess.

For assessing potential overtaking opportunities, the opposite lane is my friend.

[waremark]

The less time and space in the opposite lane, the better.

So you can see that is not what we teach. Most of us believe that if we can see that it is safe to use the opposite lane and there is an advantage in doing so, then we should. Would you like to explain why you don't agree?

[Astraist]

I don't think the difference is as big as you display it. If I feel that moving offside yields an advantage of better vision, I would choose it (as I do in times) but I don't usually see the need for it. In most situations where I overtake I clearly see, from my position in my lane, the road ahead, including oncoming vehicles and the sapce I want to reach. If I can't, I too will move offside to provide me with that information. I'll experiment with it tommorow.

[waremark]

In most situations where I overtake I clearly see, from my position in my lane, the road ahead, including oncoming vehicles and the sapce I want to reach.

I think the extra vision from the offside is generally down the nearside of the road (looking for entrances etc), of bikes etc which might be concealed by the overtake target, and getting the best view of gaps between vehicles ahead. Unless we have had an unusually good view, most of us do not generally commit to the overtake until we have crossed the centre line. We do not feel at all bad about deciding from that position not to overtake, but we don't go there unless we can see that there is no traffic coming the other way for quite a distance.

[MGF]

Although a final check, whilst offside, to confirm that all is ok, is ideal (is that what it is?) it does tend to encourage following very closely for sustained periods to reduce the amount of space that needs to be passed when a decision is made to commit.

[Astraist]

Now I understand. There is a different quality to the English scenery, which includes entrances along the near-side of the road. The typical Israeli single-carriageway (and likewise in most other countries I've visited) there is little to no surprises on the nearside and there is good view. If I was faced with the potential hazards of a rural road with entrances to the sides I would choose to off-side early. Otherwise, unless there is a problem with the visual field, I wouldn't have to.

[ScoobyChris]

Now I understand. There is a different quality to the English scenery, which includes entrances along the near-side of the road. The typical Israeli single-carriageway (and likewise in most other countries I've visited) there is little to no surprises on the nearside and there is good view. If I was faced with the potential hazards of a rural road with entrances to the sides I would choose to off-side early. Otherwise, unless there is a problem with the visual field, I wouldn't have to.

Another consideration is the road surface and the offside check also enables us to look for puddles, debris, pot-holes, etc in the road ahead of the overtakee, which they may swerve to avoid and may compromise the overtake. It also allows us to choose a place to "land" after the overtake and if there is surface water ahead, we may decide that remaining offside for a period after the overtake is desirable and so factor this in before committing.

Chris

[redbeard]

One other problem I came across the other day when behind a tractor,

Said tractor tanking along at a shade over 40mph which only left my minibus with 5mph to play with, this did not stop the plonker in the artic behind me leaning on his horn when I failed to overtake on a very short straight section, when I did overtake on the next, longer, safe section he actually followed me (at 50mph) and was halfway past the tractor when he realised that there was no room for both me and him to get past (ie i was not going to speed up for his benefit) and he was left with no choice but to stand on the brakes and barely made it back behind the tractor before the oncoming vehicles wiped him out.

Wonder if he learnt anything

With a driver like that I very much doubt he learned anything. More likely that he'll have considered you at fault for not speeding up to give him space. There's only so much you can do to manage the traffic around you and with idiots like that you're on a loser.

[redbeard]

Indeed I edited the message. My point is that moving all the way over to the near lane is unnecessary (in most cases, not in all of them...). The less time and space in the opposite lane, the better.

I find that an overtake that can be completely assessed, planned and committed to from within my own lane is the exception rather than the rule. I find that for most overtakes I commit from the opposite lane (or at least partly across the centre line) - which means that I have moved into the opposite lane before I have decided whether I am going to overtake or not - which, in turn, means that I sometimes move into the opposite lane, decide that I'm not going to overtake, and move back into my lane still behind the vehicle I'm looking to pass. And I find that if I move into the opposite lane when I think there might be a possible opportunity coming, when it turns out that it is an opportunity I often see it earlier, which means that I sometimes make overtakes that I wouldn't have made if I'd stayed in my own lane to assess.

For assessing potential overtaking opportunities, the opposite lane is my friend.

I agree with you purely from the perspective of gaining the view to assess the potential to overtake. There is one aspect of this that, to me, doesn't quite sit right with the aim of advanced driving, ie to achieve an overtake unobtrusively. I can envisage a situation where the driver of the car you intend to overtake becomes unsettled by the the car behind, perhaps repeatedly coming out over the line. He / she might already be driving relatively slowly due to being a nervous driver. I'd be interested in people's thoughts on this.

[GJD]

I agree with you purely from the perspective of gaining the view to assess the potential to overtake. There is one aspect of this that, to me, doesn't quite sit right with the aim of advanced driving, ie to achieve an overtake unobtrusively. I can envisage a situation where the driver of the car you intend to overtake becomes unsettled by the the car behind, perhaps repeatedly coming out over the line. He / she might already be driving relatively slowly due to being a nervous driver. I'd be interested in people's thoughts on this.

I've never been very sure about the unobtrusive thing. I don't find it very helpful in guiding my thought processes. It seems to me that to some extent obtrusive is in the eye of the beholder. Some people simply object to being overtaken, no matter how safely. Some people object to seeing a car overtaking towards them, no matter how safely. Is the whole concept of overtaking obtrusive? In built up areas I often position so as to be visible early and encourage any oncoming traffic that appears to slow down. I could position less boldly and thereby have less of an impact on that oncoming traffic. Am I being obtrusive? I don't know, but I'm happy with the reasons for my positioning. My TVR is noisier than most cars. Is that obtrusive? I don't know, but I'm not going to stop driving it.

Certainly I don't want to approach any situation with a lack of consideration for other road users, or act out of arrogance or aggression. That's what I think of as important in terms of obtrusiveness.

I have found that since using the offside for vision more, I identify overtaking opportunities earlier than I would otherwise, and sometimes identify opportunities I wouldn't have even thought were there had I stayed behind. So I generally spend less time behind someone I want to overtake than I used to. Is that less obtrusive?

[redbeard]

I'd say in most cases if you're pretty confident the opportunity is there and the offside lane position confirms it there's no issue except, as you say, for the person who just does not like being overtaken. Just that if it becomes a succession of moves out to the other driver's shoulder I think most drivers would feel pressured by that.
For sure the words TVR and unobtrusive would seldom feature in the same sentence.

[Slink_Pink]

I seem to recall that the RoadCraft film shows the driver using the opposite lane (or part of) to confirm and opportunity prior to committing.

[GJD]

I'd say in most cases if you're pretty confident the opportunity is there and the offside lane position confirms it there's no issue except, as you say, for the person who just does not like being overtaken. Just that if it becomes a succession of moves out to the other driver's shoulder I think most drivers would feel pressured by that.

I see what you're getting at. I don't only have in mind situations where I'm pretty confident of the opportunity, perhaps in a relatively close following position, and move out to confirm before committing though. I was also thinking of moving offside - perhaps fully offside, perhaps not - just to gather more information. I think that has sometimes led me to see potential opportunities ahead earlier than I otherwise would have done, and sometimes to see potential opportunities that I otherwise wouldn't have realised were there until they had been and gone. Perhaps my information gathering from within my own lane could be improved.

But if I'm moving out to gather more information like that, I don't think I'm doing it from a close following position. That would hinder the objective - the closer I am, the further I have to move out to see past and the more of my attention I want to keep on the vehicle in front (so the less attention I can devote to looking far ahead).

And If I'm just moving out to what I can see, I don't want the driver ahead to think I'm starting to overtake and do something I don't want (e.g. brake). If I'm a bit further back I think they're probably less likely to. I'm not sure if that's me trying to be unobtrusive, or just me trying to avoid an awkward situation I don't want.