ADUK Archive

I think a key factor here is the nature of the lead vehicle. Most people have an expectation that they will try to overtake a tractor even if they rarely overtake anything else - so in this situation you are highly likely to be confronted with exactly the kind of behaviour witnessed...

What gear and were you full throttle?

My own approach to overtaking is changing, once upon a time I'd go gently passed where possible. Now more often I'll go full throttle as soon as I've committed.

OP doesn't mention the age of the other driver but it's pertinent to remember that drivers have, dependant upon age, been taught and tested under different regimes.
Take me, one older, it was "Mirror, signal, manoeuvre".
Note "Mirror", not mirrors, with the associated scanning that we, here, do. Nor was a shoulder check required.
Luckily I learnt this long ago, 1970 and fitted a door mirror to my Spitfire and adopted the shoulder check from my motorcycling days.
Then the nearside mirror also appeared and that too is very useful to provide information.
Of course, there's then the queueing mentality to consider, not done to "jump the queue".

WhoseGeneration wrote:Of course, there's then the queueing mentality to consider, not done to "jump the queue".

Isn't it a queue only if it moves?! the main problems are 1) people don't know how to overtake and 2) people don't like being overtaken.

What we need to do is equip our cars with Bond-esque equipment...

Octy_Ross wrote:

WhoseGeneration wrote:What we need to do is equip our cars with Bond-esque equipment...

Or, just educate all drivers to be able to drive, in all the situations they might find themselves in.
You know, the stuff that it appears only the AD organisations want to promulgate.
Government, it would seem, not interested in that approach.

Octy_Ross wrote:What gear and were you full throttle?

My own approach to overtaking is changing, once upon a time I'd go gently passed where possible. Now more often I'll go full throttle as soon as I've committed.

Second or third, probably third; probably not full given a bit of caution, but not far off either.

WhoseGeneration wrote:OP doesn't mention the age of the other driver but it's pertinent to remember that drivers have, dependant upon age, been taught and tested under different regimes.

70 or 80 at a guess.

trashbat wrote:

ScoobyChris wrote:I can't comment on what would have worked better as I wasn't there, but I think it's worth considering each overtake as an individual overtake (complete with escape plan)

In open road situations I do this, but in this instance I treated the queue as a whole, since it was bunched and therefore there were no interim escape options.

IMHO, that was alot of vehicles to overtake without an escape option! I tend not to contemplate passing more than two vehicles without a gap to slot back into, because not matter what the speed difference, the situation can change and you may find yourself wanting to abort the maneuver. If the traffic is dense enough so you have no safe gap to merge back into then a coming together (in classic Murray Walker speak) might become unavoidable. I'm glad to hear it was only wing mirrors and pride damaged this time...

What did the other driver say when you stopped?

Been following this thread on Pistoheads as well, so been dissecting how I approach a potential multi-vehicle overtake: when they arise, I'm trying to take into account:

- My commit distance - in other words, where's my next check point for continuing the manoeuvre? It may be 2, 3, 5 vehicles down the line - wherever there's a point where I could drop back in without causing others to take avoiding action. Obviously the longer the commit distance, the longer a sight line you need at any given speed. So I'm not committing without a check point being visible.
- my ability to react to someone pulling out.
- the sight line as it exists at the start of the overtake and as it develops during the overtake
- the assumed ability to perceive and react of the drivers I'm overtaking. This is particularly true on a bike - most car drivers simply cannot conceive of a bike's ability to accelerate and therefore don't factor it in. However it's also true of high performance cars.
- My likely terminal velocity at the end of the manoeuvre - I may be able to complete the manoeuvre safely only by using so much power that I then have to immediately scrub off 40-50mph. Embarrassing at best…
- plus of course all the usual stuff for a single vehicle overtake...

So throttle use then becomes a function of all of the above, factored by the vehicle I'm driving: If I'm in my diesel 4x4 I may well use full throttle at first, to minimise TED., remembering that my overtaking ambition is much more limited than in my other vehicles. In my 911 or on a bike, I'd say that if I HAVE to use full throttle to complete an overtake, I'm probably pushing my luck on a public road - in a multi-vehicle overtake, full throttle for more than a second or two would have me straight into custodial sentence territory and certainly violating conditions 2 and 4 above. Where that extra power does help is when acceleration helps you get out of a developing situation (for instance, seeing the person you're overtaking start to pull out when you're fully alongside).

When I reach an intermediate check point, if I do have to drop it, I'll always try to match speed before pulling in, rather than dive in and slam on the brakes. Of course, that then gives Mr Angry Numpty a chance to try to deliberately close the gap and prevent me completing the manoeuvre - something else to watch for.