Indicators do you use them or not?

[Dryce]

Because your road positioning should make it clearly obvious to road users behind and in front of you.

The purpose of indicating is about your intent to change road position.

The argument with stationary vehicle assumes that the driver behind or in front is able to read your actions. There is no guarantee of that. Indicating makes it clear that something is going on.

 

[Dryce]

the other side to indicating all the time is you then become trained to indicate at every manouvre and your awareness drops.

'Hey i put my indicator on so i'm fine'

That, sadly, is actually a significant improvement on not putting on the indicator and carrying out the manoeuvre with the same attitude!

 

[Dieselman]

Nah..!! But I have been known to use the occasional hand signal...

 

[Dryce]

If an Advanced Instructor asks "Why did you just indicate?" you'd better know who it was you were indicating to - if they were a pedestrian the colour of their clothes, if another driver, the colour of their vehicle...

That makes the point of awareness or lack thereof while under instruction.

But I'm indicating as a warning. And regardless of how good I think my awareness is there's a chance that my observation or assessment of a situation could be amiss in some way.

I'm not interested in the colour of a pedestrian's clothing. I'm worried about where they are and what they might be about to do. If the situation is complex I'm better applying my limited faculties to the next *material* aspect of my situation.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

Nah..!! But I have been known to use the occasional hand signal...

Indicators, like The Beatles - Over rated.

 

[215m3]

The purpose of indicating is about your intent to change road position.

The argument with stationary vehicle assumes that the driver behind or in front is able to read your actions. There is no guarantee of that. Indicating makes it clear that something is going on.

You are correct, but if you are in the solo parked car that i have moved out to overtake say 100m away, if your indicator is not on, then you are not intending to move off so won't be moving into my path and secondly, by seeing a car in the middle of the road preparing to pass you, would you set off or wait until it had passed?

I could be indicating and there could be a side road on the opposite side of the road. Now would i be truning right or passing the stationary car. I would presume(not assume) turning right. Just my take on it.

 

[Dryce]

I could be indicating and there could be a side road on the opposite side of the road. Now would i be truning right or passing the stationary car. I would presume(not assume) turning right. Just my take on it.

Makes no difference. You're making assumptions about what the stationary car may or may not read from your actions.

The purpose of indicating is simple. To warn other users of your intent to undertake a manoeuvre. The indicator does not explicitly mean "I am going to turn right" or "I am going to change lane" or "I am going to pass you".

It gives an indication of the fact that you are about to undertake a manoeuvre. And that a vehicle should not pass on that side of you from behind. And after that it's anybody's guess depending on their assessment of the whole situation. And that assessment may be be based on different information (they have a different perspective) and their own interpretation.

 

[popuptoaster]

i'd still rather indicate than not, i cant think of any situation where indicating is worse than not indicating, even if i indiocate to pull out round a vehicle and the follwing car thinks i'm turning right, its still down to them not to undertake me thinking its clear unless im in a right turn lane or in a traffic queue.

I dont use my indicators as justification to drive like a loon, or a road hog, and im pretty much aware or whats around me all the time, but we all make mistakes and miss things sometimes. Also i dont trust other peoples indicators, its to easy to leave them on so i wont pull out until im sure they are turning in even if they are blinking like mad, but at least i think about what they are doing which i might not had they not been indicating.

My other pet peeve is people who brake first and then indicate they are turning afterwards, sposed to be mirror, signal, manouvere.

 

[stevesey]

Seems to be two camps here then -

Those who indicate if their observation and assement suggests it is needed.

Those who indicate by default, but don't if their observation and assement suggests it could be more hazardous to indictate than not.

In practice the end result will often be exactly same - are we just debating semantics?

 

[popuptoaster]

Aah maybe, but debate is what a forum is all about, no one has resorted to name calling yet which means were only just getting warmed up.

 

[Dryce]

In practice the end result will often be exactly same - are we just debating semantics?

No we're debating the approach to dealing with indicator use.

 

[robert.saunders]

When do we move on to usage of hazard lights? They really get on my nerves...

 

[Dryce]

When do we move on to usage of hazard lights? They really get on my nerves...

Don't get me started on these. They're flawed right from the get go. If used when stationary they can only be differentiated from an indicator if both can clearly be seen simultaneously at front or rear.

Originally only to be used when stationary. Then some bright spark thought they should be used when towing and that became the norm.

Now in UK they are often used to acknowledge the driver behind.

All perfectly logical.

 

[Dieselman]

Now in UK they are often used to acknowledge the driver behind.

If I see them used on a moving car then I assume they are being used accurately.....the driver is a ******* hazard..

 

[robert.saunders]

Don't get me started on these. They're flawed right from the get go. If used when stationary they can only be differentiated from an indicator if both can clearly be seen simultaneously at front or rear.

Originally only to be used when stationary. Then some bright spark thought they should be used when towing and that became the norm.

Now in UK they are often used to acknowledge the driver behind.

All perfectly logical.

Don't forget - "park anywhere lights" amongst all your very valid comments

 

[Dieselman]

Don't forget - "park anywhere lights" amongst all your very valid comments

Which reminds me:..

Today in the village as I came out of a shop there was a black BMW 645 cabriolet parked in a disabled space with a traffic warden just starting to make notes on his HHT.

The blonde 30+ woman running over to him from the faddy 'nail shop' didn't look too disabled to me....

 

[stevesey]

Now in UK they are often used to acknowledge the driver behind.

If only people realised the meaning of showing them two indicators.

 

[robert.saunders]

Which reminds me:..

Today in the village as I came out of a shop there was a black BMW 645 cabriolet parked in a disabled space with a traffic warden just starting to make notes on his HHT.

The blonde 30+ woman running over to him from the faddy 'nail shop' didn't look too disabled to me....

Did the blonde woman want him for anything? Perhaps she knew him?

Anyway, I assume you got your BMW away before you got a ticket; nice distraction tactic DM

 

[219]

The indicator does not explicitly mean "I am going to turn right" or "I am going to change lane" or "I am going to pass you".

It gives an indication of the fact that you are about to undertake a manoeuvre. And that a vehicle should not pass on that side of you from behind.

This is a folly that a lot of people seem to fall into .

The putting on of a trafficator absolutely , categorically , definitively DOES NOT CONFER ANY AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER TO CARRY OUT ANY INTENDED MANOEUVRE .

Whilst I would be the first to agree that it would be foolhardy and dangerous to overtake any vehicle across a junction where that vehicle may be turning right , the fact that a vehicle may have a little flashing light on one side or the other makes no difference to the rules of priority .

A better example of this , and quite a common one , is when people give a right signal before moving out a lane on a motorway , or before commencing an overtake on a single carriageway , and end up blundering out into the path of a faster vehicle coming up behind and already in the process of overtaking THEM - either because they haven't taken proper rear observation or because due to their ignorance they don't realise the faster vehicle has priority . When people do this to me , they get horn , headlamps (and blue lights if I happen to have them at the time ) to make them realise they have done wrong .

The same people are the ones who come down motorway slip roads , throw on a signal ( which should NEVER be given to join a motorway : where else can you possibly be going ? ) and blunder out into the path of traffic already on the carriageway , possibly causing the other traffic to take evasive action .

Same applies if you turn into a side road as a pedestrian is stepping off the pavement to cross , whether or not you were signalling makes no difference at all to the fact that the pedestrian has priority and you must stop . The use of the horn is a more effective warning ( although the pedestrian may be deaf for all you know ) but even that still makes no difference to the rules of priority .

I could go on with endless examples , but I'm sure you get my drift .

 

[st4]

When do we move on to usage of hazard lights? They really get on my nerves...

If I see them used on a moving car then I assume they are being used accurately.....the driver is a ******* hazard..

You are only allowed to use them on a motorway when moving if a sudden hazard appears and you think it will benefit other drivers. Not that long ago (I breaked the rules as it was a dual carriage way 70mph limit) a swan appeared and decided to cross the road and I braked suddenly to come to a standstill, I applied the hazards too to let the car (about 300ms behind me) that there was an "adverse" situation and I was experiencing a hazard.

You see people can misjudge by how much you brake and not anticipate a full on emergency stop on an otherwise free flowing 70mph road. A hazard light is an "out of the ordinary" occurance and may alert the dozy plonker behind you that something more serious than a wee dab of the brakes have occured.

When used in emegency situations they are all well and good.

Now to move to my next bug bear, people "flashing" their lights to let other road users out of junctions. They are actually meant to alert someone to you're presence not a greeeting/I am letting you out as that can mislead other road users