Is it just me, or is indicating going out of fashion?

alastairq

I will mention is the driver who 'tailgates' me, as if they would very much like to possess my rear bumper. I usually tap my brake pedal sharply at least twice and mouth "Back Off!!!" (or similar) in the mirror, which sometimes does the trick. Failing that, I just go slower. And slower. They are doing this because they think I am not going fast enough, it usually penetrates their dim faculties that I am trying to demonstrate that they are in the wrong.

Looks like you're fighting fire-with-fire?

Who, then, is the bad driver?

And you make an assumption about what they are thinking too?

Have they ever hit you, or had problems coping with what you do?

Do they even realise what they are doing is 'potentially' of a dangerous nature?

Or is the reality that, you yourself actually feel intimidated by their presence?
[this is a very common aspect]

The 'proper ' way to deal with a tailgater is to slow early, but more gently.

This gives the other driver time to adjust their own speed accordingly.

You are, in effect 'controlling' the other driver. [if only they realised too?}

I don't have any issues with folk tailgating me.....aside from amazement , on occasions. [most of the vehicles I'm in have absolutely no passive crash protection at all, so someone disappearing up my backside in that instance, would do themselves very serious harm...as well as spoiling their paintwork.

In my car, I simply don't bother. I'm always on the look-out for someone to finance my next new motor, and a tailgater will do very nicely, thank you.

I am not adverse to not making life easy for them, either.

In other words, I carry on doing, what I am doing.

If intimidation is an issue, why not just cockle the interior mirror to one side so they cannot be seen. The door mirrors do nicely for sideways moves, etc...

SCO

Strider590 wrote: »

You don't need to indicate if you move left UNLESS your leaving the motorway.

The reason for this is related to middle lane drivers.......
Lane 1 is the normal lane, lane 2 and 3 are overtaking lanes, when you overtake on a single carriageway, you indicate to overtake and you pull back in. A motorway is no different, you indicate to overtake, you SHOULD return to your lane and everyone else SHOULD expect you to do so.

As recommended by the IAM.

In practice, because some people are idiots, indicating left might be necessary in certain circumstances.

It is just lazyness not to signal.

It is a matter of courtesy to signal back in and also lets other road users know your intention.

Surprised IAM recommend that.

Strider590

SCO wrote: »

It is just lazyness not to signal.

It is a matter of courtesy to signal back in and also lets other road users know your intention.

Surprised IAM recommend that.

Curious as to how actively checking all mirrors and blind spots and then deciding a signal is not needed, is lazy????

The alternative being signal automatically (as a lot of people do) and then blindly hope there's no body in the way?

tony6403

A bit off topic and a non statutory form of indication , but it really p1sses me off when I give way to an oncoming car and the driver doesn't indicate thanks by raising a hand.
Petulant I know , but I sometimes give a V to retaliate.

Strider590

tony6403 wrote: »

A bit off topic and a non statutory form of indication , but it really p1sses me off when I give way to an oncoming car and the driver doesn't indicate thanks by raising a hand.
Petulant I know , but I sometimes give a V to retaliate.

Simple, don't give way to German cars.

almillar

'That's strange..I can't identify anyone who needs to know.

Maybe you're driving in a differnt part of the word to me?'

alistairq - Sorry, I used the word 'need', like you do, and I shouldn't have.
I should have said 2 people that could find an indicator useful, rather than that need you to indicate.
You only seem to want to indicate as a last resort, an admission of failure somehow - not indicating, on our busy roads, should be a very rare occurrence.

jase1

Strider590 wrote: »

Curious as to how actively checking all mirrors and blind spots and then deciding a signal is not needed, is lazy????

The alternative being signal automatically (as a lot of people do) and then blindly hope there's no body in the way?

I think it's pretty obvious that the problem drivers are not the IAM/Roadcraft followers of this world.

Give an idiot an inch ("you don't have to indicate if there's no-one around"), and they'll take a mile ("I can't be bothered to indicate at all").

As to the second point, this isn't an either/or thing -- both not bothering to indicate, and not looking where one is going are moronic methods of driving.

BUT, if someone is going to just pull out in front of me, I'd still rather they gave me a couple of seconds' notice by indicating first! :rotfl:

Strider590

jase1 wrote: »

Give an idiot an inch ("you don't have to indicate if there's no-one around"), and they'll take a mile ("I can't be bothered to indicate at all").

Isn't that like saying "give a man a drink and he'll turn into an alcoholic"?

There's more than one reason why people don't indicate and one doesn't lead to the other.

I've seen drivers indicate to go round a bend in the road because it was an automatic response to turning a corner, for some it's part of the actual turn, they do it AFTER braking and during the turn.

Some can't be bothered at all, some use when needed, some use because they think they always have to, most just do it without any planning or thought.

jase1

Strider590 wrote: »

Isn't that like saying "give a man a drink and he'll turn into an alcoholic"?

No. .

alastairq

You only seem to want to indicate as a last resort, an admission of failure somehow

On the contrary...I used the word 'need'....which doesn't mean 'if I really must!'

To identify a 'need' involves considerable use of observation.

Equally, it can be said, those that signal regardless....do so in order that they don't need to apply proper and correct observations.

So, it can be said, those that signal regardless of a need, do so because they are too lazy? [To effect proper and correct observations...a case of ''I've signalled so that's all I need to do?'']

However, to go one further, there are many situations, especially in heavily-trafficked, built-up areas where, to indicate 'simply because that was what I was taught'...as so many on here seem to imply....may in fact be, or lead to, a very misleading signal, to other road users.

For example, to pass a cyclist, one may use a dedicated 'turn-right' lane, if it is clear, and safe to do so...to give the cyclist room whilst overtaking.

In such an instance, to give a signal would be totally misleading to all other road users....so no signal, is the correct signal.

The same if, when intending to pass a cyclist, and up ahead is a road off to the right...which might have traffic waiting to emerge, a 'right' signal to indicate your change-of-position to pass the cyclist would also become misleading to others, very quickly.

[I doubt many drivers on here actually give much thought to the other aspect of indication..that being, when to cancel the indicator?]

Overtaking a cyclist might not even involve a change-of-position at all.

If the carriageway were wide enough, and one already had adopted a road position which, if it were maintained, would give the cyclist the proscribed amount of room.....indicating [an intended change of position] would in fact be entirely incorrect. The road position would not change at all.

So.....signal, if necessary. [ie, you perceive a 'need' to inform others.]

Of course, if unwilling to exercise effective observation, or do not know how to..then signal under every and any circumstance....but....don't spend the rest of your life driving like that?