TR4ffic wrote: As an AD, can you see a scenario where you end up on the wrong side of a decision because those ‘judging’ you fail to see (understand) what you were doing/attempting to do… Where you effectively end up being penalised for having a driving standard higher than that of the general populous.!?
Trouble is, this all gets very 'circular' - indeed I may have posted the question on the wrong thread, since it was the Masters thread which prompted it!
The theme then moves to an ever-recurring question: what sets AD apart from 'DSA L'? Apart from 'higher' standards (smoother use of controls, better forward obs and planning, etc.), what 'actions' form a distinction between the two levels, and how can they be specified (for training) and assessed (for tests)?
The one which springs to mind is use of the road width, typically positioning for corners. Again, this crashes another thread, that on 'offsiding'. So let's use that to answer your question! I'm not a great fan of offsiding for view, although I do 'straightline' when safety and view permit.
But let's have a scenario where someone's offsiding; how might our jury perceive that?
As an aside, a friend was at a family get-together, and mentioned to a relly that he was a motorcyclists. The relative then told him about a motorcyclists he'd followed who was struggling to control his bike - indeed was weaving about horrendously. Some careful questioning by my friend eventually determined that the unknown rider was probably using 'cornering lines' to negotiate a set of bends!