ADUK Archive

Hmmm, I think I'd better not do any overtaking at all when my test comes around. I am (on my own) a believer in getting the overtake done as quickly as possible then ease back as appropriate once back in my lane. Something in my head says do anything to minimise time spent on the wrong side of the road.

devonutopia wrote:Hmmm, I think I'd better not do any overtaking at all when my test comes around.

If you are being held up by a hesitant driver and decline safe and appropriate overtaking opportunities you will be marked down on the test.

As an advanced rider you would be expected to be able to accurately identify safe and appropriate overtaking opportunities even when subject to various constraints such as speed limits.

I understand (and to a degree approve of) the idea of minimizing the time on the wrong side of the road, but provided you select a location where you can see that there are no other hazards, and that there is no realistic prospect of an unseen hazard then there is no inherent danger in being in such a position.

Under RoADAR you would indeed be expected to minimize the time spent there, but within the constraints of both safety and legality.

Two thoughts about the recent posts by waremark and devonutopia:

One is to question the relevance of advanced tests for a driver who does not normally refrain from exceeding the NSL when overtaking, and might also break certain other rules from time to time. Suggestion: compliance with the requirements of advanced tests runs counter (in my mind anyhow) to the exercise of good quality, but uninhibted, judgement; and that's what advanced driving should be about.

The other thing is about minimising the time exposed to danger when overtaking. Minimising TED is a good policy of course, but what's wrong with staying offside longer than is strictly necessary when completing an overtake, so long as there is no danger in doing so? Many people seem afraid of crossing the centre-line and freely using the 'wrong' side of the road, and I see this as indicative of a relative lack of understanding and confidence.

Edit No. 3:

I see that Michael has also picked up on this 'wrong side of the road' business, and quite right too.

TripleS wrote:compliance with the requirements of advanced tests runs counter (in my mind anyhow) to the exercise of good quality, but uninhibted, judgement; and that's what advanced driving should be about.

Agreed, but compliance while preparing for a test is a useful exercise in self-discipline and precision.

TripleS wrote:Many people seem afraid of crossing the centre-line and freely using the 'wrong' side of the road, and I see this as indicative of a relative lack of understanding and confidence.

Agreed - many see being across the line as automatically unsafe or even dangerous, and this is really just a failure in their observation and interpretation of what they see. One aspect of advanced driving is knowing what's safe or unsafe, (and having the option to drive accordingly), rather than making unthinking assumptions.

TripleS wrote:The other thing is about minimising the time exposed to danger when overtaking. Minimising TED is a good policy of course

I do agree with this sentiment. I'd like to minimise danger rather than minimise time.

michael769 wrote:

devonutopia wrote:Hmmm, I think I'd better not do any overtaking at all when my test comes around.

If you are being held up by a hesitant driver and decline safe and appropriate overtaking opportunities you will be marked down on the test.

In that scenario I would assume there would be adequate difference between the speed limit and the driver speed which would mean use of full throttle would not endanger me > NSL. I'm talking about say someone doing just over 50 in an NSL. I would not want to be doing a steady 60 past them. It's pretty much full throttle until I am passed, then ease back. Obviously doing this with the other car doing 50 will probably involve me temporarily doing in excess of 70 for what I deem a safe overtake, before easing back.

On a test this would be frowned upon, but overtaking someone at 40, using 3rd gear WOT to 60mph - that would feel safer in my book.

obviously I am also still at the learning stage, so can't really comment from anything other than driving experience in general.

devonutopia wrote:obviously I am also still at the learning stage, so can't really comment from anything other than driving experience in general.

We're all at the learning stage if we're lucky. That or we're stuck.

7db wrote:

devonutopia wrote:obviously I am also still at the learning stage, so can't really comment from anything other than driving experience in general.

We're all at the learning stage if we're lucky. That or we're stuck.

Very true. I also have a guilty pleasure in that I enjoy using the loud pedal in my car so during an overtake am more likely to keep my eyes on the road/manouvere, than the speedo. The noise, acceleration, grip, etc are all quite addictive. I should save it for the trackdays of course, but sometimes I just feel the need to test the in-gear times.

Got my 30 to 70 down to under 4 seconds with a gearchange now.

What's really classy, of course, is taking an overtake that you have set-up and judged so finely that you don't need to drop all your power to get past: you can waft past, settle, wave, and *then* use all the performance of the vehicle.

Sit next to someone doing that, and you will feel very secure that they've really got the overtake comfortable. The overtakee won't feel like they just had their doors blown off, either. The other kind feels like the driver has cut his decision so fine that he's throwing everything at it and might just have to get out and push in order to get this car back to safety in time.

Yep - always an aim of course. I also have to be concious my exhaust is out the left side of the car, so if I am on full power I am likely to be distracting / surprising / startling the slower driver, which in itself could cause them to become a hazard to me during the manouvere.

I'm playing with this a bit at the moment because I'm preparing for my IAM Masters. I haven't had any mentoring yet but the huge volume of debate and reportage on the IAM forum suggests that the examiner will want to see a drive that is strictly legal but takes safe opportunities for progress.

At the moment I'm thinking I'll probably do what I have done in the past on RoSPA tests which is to make it clear to the examiner through my commentary that, but for the speed limit, I think a safe opportunity exists but that I'm not going to take it because my driving plan would involve breaking the law.

Incidentally, as I pay more attention to exact compliance withe my speedometer's reading than I normally do, what I notice is that single carriageway A&B roads are quite easy to do with full legal compliance but that motorway driving without ever exceeding indicated 70mph requires serious forward planning to maintain a really good quality safety bubble. Fun!

James