Should be a light for....

pendulum

Wig wrote: »

And you would be incorrect to think otherwise, obviously this light would indicate the driver infront has lifted the foot for a significant time and is continuing to do so, and as long as that is the case the car will be slowing down. Very unlikely to get any false readings, and the vast majority of the time the light would function correctly.

Rubbish. Just because a driver lifts their foot off the accelerator for 5 seconds doesn't mean it's a sign for the driver behind to overtake. The light would be coming on all the time without the driver even knowing, and the driver behind could only guess at what it meant, if anything. Confusion galore. If you want a light which says "Overtake me", then try a left indicator. Much more effective... either that or just drive normally in the first place.

Wig wrote: »

So what is your disagreement? Is it just a pedantic "well the light could be faulty so they cannot be 100% sure" ? That's a bit silly really isn't it? You could say that about brake lights, why have them when they are not 100% accurate?

Haha, not at all. There's so many fundamental, major things wrong with your suggestion that there's no need to nitpick.

Wig wrote: »

You want me to wave my hand out the window all the time, again pretty stupid suggestion.

Using well established and understood hand signals is a stupid suggestion? Well it's a damn site better than your one.

I thought you were joking when you first suggested it. That's how bad your idea is.

Ask yourself why not a single driver here so far has agreed with you that it's a good idea? Why do you think that is? :rotfl:

spikyone

pendulum wrote: »

But if you're always going so slow in the name of fuel saving and you feel guilty about holding people up, your probably taking things too far and should just speed up a bit...

Spot on. I seem to remember there's a fault in the driving test, something along the lines of "failing to make progress" - and you can be failed for it. Unless road conditions dictate otherwise, you should be driving at (or reasonably close to) the speed limit.
Of course, if you're driving at the speed limit and people are getting annoyed, that's their problem... :cool:

rodenal

When the hell are you going to be freewheeling at any point unless you are coming up to a junction in which case why would I need something to tell me you are slowing down and why you are doing it? I have eyes and a sense of distance and speed.

If you are rolling along nsl roads at 30-40mph then I also sure as hell don't need an indicator to tell me when to overtake

jase1

Tell you what we could do with...

A bright coloured strip across the side of a car that lights up under heavy acceleration.

That way these idiots who try to cause trouble by piddling around at 40mph then floor it the second anyone tries to overtake them are giving off documentary evidence of their actions in the event of a resulting crash.

Light-strip + in-car camera = lawsuit. Evil slow driver thwarted.

Bongles

spikyone wrote: »

I seem to remember there's a fault in the driving test, something along the lines of "failing to make progress" - and you can be failed for it.

On your driving test you are required to demonstrate the ability to make good progress and you can be marked down for failing to do so. That does not translate to an obligation to make maximum safe progress at all times. You have to be able to do it if you choose to. You do not have to choose to do it .

Edit: And if you choose not to make maximum safe progress you should help other people to pass you - which seems to be exactly the OP's motivation, even if his proposed solution seems a little odd.

spikyone

Bongles wrote: »

That does not translate to an obligation to make maximum safe progress at all times. You have to be able to do it if you choose to. You do not have to choose to do it .

There are multiple other mentions of this elsewhere online, but I'm going to cite this:

The examiner is expecting you to

1. Drive up to the speed limit if road, weather and traffic conditions permit or at a realistic speed if not

Driving faults recorded
20 Progress

Appropriate speed:

Makes no attempt to achieve maximum speeds for the road when safe to do so.

If anyone can find official DSA marking guidelines that contradict this, I'm happy to be corrected.

EDIT: and if you look at the marking form here, you'll see that "use of speed" (#18) is a separate fault to "appropriate speed" (#20 Progress). It seems reasonably clear that #20 can only mean driving too slowly, particularly when the other part of #20 is "undue hesitation" - I got hit with that second one on my test for being cautious at a roundabout where I knew traffic often failed to indicate when turning right...

Kuchkaskov1989

äààà âîò !û ì!å ñêîðîñòü ïî!ûñòðåå

Bongles

spikyone wrote: »

There are multiple other mentions of this elsewhere online, but I'm going to cite this:

The examiner is expecting you to

Drive up to the speed limit if road, weather and traffic conditions permit or at a realistic speed if not

Agreed. It is not appropriate to give someone a driving licence if they are unable to do that. But that doesn't mean that someone who has a driving licence (and so has demonstrated that they are capable of doing that) is obliged to exercise that ability at all times.

spikyone

Bongles wrote: »

Agreed. It is not appropriate to give someone a driving licence if they are unable to do that. But that doesn't mean that someone who has a driving licence (and so has demonstrated that they are capable of doing that) is obliged to exercise that ability at all times.

I would agree that if someone is unable or unwilling to drive at an appropriate speed, they shouldn't be given a licence. But why would it suddenly become acceptable to drive at an inappropriate speed once they have a licence? Surely - regardless of how many others on the road are willing to drive too fast/slow, fail to indicate, etc, etc - good driving means always driving in a manner that would not cause you to fail a driving test?

Strider590

spikyone wrote: »

good driving means always driving in a manner that would not cause you to fail a driving test?

No, it mean's be aware of your surroundings and drive accordingly.
The worst drivers are those who go into auto-pilot, where everything happens out of habit rather than via an active thought process.