Indicating after an overtake

dudara

I also love the people who indicate only after they've started to overtake. Why bother in that situation?

I do indicate my return to the "lesser" lane (be it driving lane or first overtaking lane) when on a DC/TC/Motorway. I find myself doing it even on a regular road, probably because it's become force of habit.

vibe666

Yes I do. There's a reason it'd called an 'indicator'. You are indicating to other road users that you are changing lane, regardless of how obvious you think it is to everyone else on the road as you can't always be 100% sure that everyone else on the road is paying attention to what you are out have been doing.

You could be the best driver in the world, but you can't be sure that everyone else is and you can't stop other people from being idiots, so make a point of doing it all the time and pretty soon it will become habit and you'll do it automatically and if the worst goes happen, if you indicated your intentions and you obeyed the RotR, it can't be used against you, especially if you were caught on camera, which is becoming increasingly likely in the emerging dashcam age.

No Pants

I indicate before overtaking and after overtaking. I know that it's not strictly necessary after overtaking, but it's more about keeping up the habit of checking my left mirror and indicating.

vibe666

Mirror, signal, manoeuvre. Simples.

r3nu4l

challengemaster wrote: »

Nope. Always make sure I'm a good bit past the car before moving back over, but in all honesty - where the fluich do they think I'm going to go? Continue driving on the wrong side of the road?

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

No, its obvious to all cars around I am re-merging.

Really? I think you'd be surprised. First you have the numpties who speed up when you try to overtake so indicating at least lets those morons know that you intend to merge back into the driving lane and gives them the chance to stop being complete pillocks.

Secondly, some people are just idiots. Never assume that they will know what you are going to do. I'd rather they thought I was turning left and actually slowed a bit more than not realise I intended to merge again.

cormie wrote: »

The reason the instructor at the time told me was so not to confuse the drivers behind as they may think I'm then about to turn left ahead for example. I've just followed that since and never felt the need to change it.

Goes to show the standard of teaching. I was told to always indicate after overtaking. During my test I had only one fault and that was when the instructor thought I hadn't looked in a mirror when approaching a roundabobut. (I had looked)

corktina wrote: »

I was taught NOT to do it, but then that was in the UK and what do they know? Not like they see a lot of traffic is it.

The woman across the road from me (here in England) is a driving instructor and we had this conversation in the New Year when I returned from Christmas in Ireland, about differences in standards of driving between the UK and Ireland. One of my bugbears was lack of indication on roundabouts in Ireland and we got talking about indicating in general. She told me that she instructs people to indicate in all cases when the car changes lane, on multi-carriageway and single-carriageway roads. So the differences between instructors is not just an Irish thing by the looks of it.

CramCycle

cormie wrote: »

I was told not to when I was doing my pre-test on a single lane road based on the fact that it should be obvious you're going to return to the lane considering the lane you're driving in when doing the overtaking manoeuvre isn't actually a lane that you should be driving in.

Driving on Irish roads, what is obviously going to happen and what actually is going to happen are two completely different things alot of the time.

corktina wrote: »

I was taught NOT to do it, but then that was in the UK and what do they know? Not like they see a lot of traffic is it.

I was told in the UK that not indicating was incorrect as you are changing lanes, even if it is obvious and the Police will pull you for it as it indicates you are not concentrating/aware.

pippip wrote: »

Instructor said you can give people the impression you are turning when you are not.

Where do they think you are going to turn? In front of them, so they will be expecting you to be in front of them soon, so if they were planning on speeding up, they know it is a bad idea and adjust their behaviour accordingly.

r3nu4l wrote: »

She told me that she instructs people to indicate in all cases when the car changes lane, on multi-carriageway and single-carriageway roads. So the differences between instructors is not just an Irish thing by the looks of it.

That was my understanding as well, you are still changing lanes during an overtake so you still indicate. It also shows your intentions (I have seen cars doing multiple overtakes at once on the N81 so what is obvious is not always what happens or cars turning left mid over take/just after).

kippy

I always do it....single or multilane. Its a goo habit to get into.

ironclaw

I've witnessed people in the UK and USA being pulled by police for failing to indicate. And I agree with it.

If you don't, its kinda like when you are in a lane for turning left for example and don't indicate. How often have you seen someone go straight on or completely ignore the road markings in such a situation? Is it 'obvious' what they intend to do? This is a classic example:

http://goo.gl/maps/FXURs

Left lane is left turn only, right lane is straight on. 9 times out of 10, if someone isn't indicating in the left lane I exercise a bit of caution and about 50% of the time they just drive straight on. So to be honest the 'obvious' argument holds no weight. You assuming the other person can read your mind and your also assuming everyone else is a great driver who would do what you would in the same situation. Both really dangerous assumptions in my opinion. Most cars have '3 flash' indicator stalks, just tap them after you check your mirror. Done.

Del2005

vibe666 wrote: »

Yes I do. There's a reason it'd called an 'indicator'. You are indicating to other road users that you are changing lane, regardless of how obvious you think it is to everyone else on the road as you can't always be 100% sure that everyone else on the road is paying attention to what you are out have been doing.

You could be the best driver in the world, but you can't be sure that everyone else is and you can't stop other people from being idiots, so make a point of doing it all the time and pretty soon it will become habit and you'll do it automatically and if the worst goes happen, if you indicated your intentions and you obeyed the RotR, it can't be used against you, especially if you were caught on camera, which is becoming increasingly likely in the emerging dashcam age.

The ROTR aren't a law to be obeyed. You only get in trouble for not obeying the Statutes. If it's not illegal due to Statute then it doesn't matter how many videos of the act are available there is nothing that can be used against you.

stoneill

ironclaw wrote: »

I'm struggling to think of a situation where if you are to the extreme right of someone, they would believe that if you indicated left, you would be turning left i.e. Passing in front of them and continuing to the left to turn.

I was always taught to signal my intentions. I signal when a road is completely empty. Sounds stupid saying it but I don't see why you wouldn't. A few people here have used the word 'assume' to describe what another driver should be thinking. Assumption is the mother of all f**k ups. You have to drive like everyone around you is an utter moron as the vast majority are.

You should see some of those feckers in the morning at a junction near where I live.
A single lane road up a hill becomes 2 lanes approaching junction, the left for turning left and straight on, the right for turning right only.
The left lane is much busier, with a queue, mostly wanting to go straight on.
However, quite a number of drivers think that they are entitled to rip up the right hand lane and then suddenly turn left in front of the queue.

I am amazed that no major accident hasn't taken place.
At least they use indicators though.

CramCycle

Del2005 wrote: »

If it's not illegal due to Statute then it doesn't matter how many videos of the act are available there is nothing that can be used against you.

Driving without due care and attention
Dangerous driving
etc.
Nice catch all phrases for a situation like this.

vibe666

Del2005 wrote: »

The ROTR aren't a law to be obeyed. You only get in trouble for not obeying the Statutes. If it's not illegal due to Statute then it doesn't matter how many videos of the act are available there is nothing that can be used against you.

and can you link to the specific statute that says you shouldn't indicate at all times when changing lanes?

As I've already said "mirror, signal, manoeuvre".

It's drummed into you when you learn to drive for a reason and the only reason NOT to do it is by making the assumption that everyone around you knows exactly what you intend to do at all times when you are changing lanes, which is a recipe for disaster, sooner or later.

Del2005

CramCycle wrote: »

Driving without due care and attention
Dangerous driving
etc.
Nice catch all phrases for a situation like this.

Yes they are statutes and the ROTR aren't. If the first couple of pages of the ROTR didn't expressly stated it's not a law, it's an interpretation of the law, I'd be worried about not obeying them.

In the statutes there is no mention of the need to indicate when overtaking.

vibe666

Del2005 wrote: »

Yes they are statutes and the ROTR aren't. If the first couple of pages of the ROTR didn't expressly stated it's not a law, it's an interpretation of the law, I'd be worried about not obeying them.

In the statutes there is no mention of the need to indicate when overtaking.

I'm on my phone at the moment, but I would be very surprised if there isn't something in there about signaling when changing lanes which is a prerequisite for overtaking unless you plan on jumping right over the car in front night rider style?

slimjimmc

Del2005 wrote: »

Yes they are statutes and the ROTR aren't. If the first couple of pages of the ROTR didn't expressly stated it's not a law, it's an interpretation of the law, I'd be worried about not obeying them.

In the statutes there is no mention of the need to indicate when overtaking.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a18

Signals by Drivers
18. (1) A driver intending to slow down, stop, or alter course, shall either give a signal by using a direction indicator or stop lamp, as appropriate, or give the appropriate hand signal set out in Table A in the Second Schedule.

In order to overtake you must alter your course to get around the person/animal/object/vehicle/obstruction in front.

vibe666

slimjimmc wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a18

In order to overtake you must alter your course to get around the person/animal/object/vehicle/obstruction in front.

aaaaaaaand /thread. :pac:

mathepac

Del2005 wrote: »

.... In the statutes there is no mention of the need to indicate when overtaking.

Oh wait a minute, that statement is total nonsense, rubbish.

Del2005 wrote: »

Yes they are statutes and the ROTR aren't. If the first couple of pages of the ROTR didn't expressly stated it's not a law, it's an interpretation of the law, I'd be worried about not obeying them. ...

I'm not sure what this statement means but if it's an attempt to justify ignoring the ROTR then the poster has no guidelines as to correct behaviour on Irish roads, probably typical of a lot of drivers.

Sorry: missed prior detailed post about statutes

Greyfoot

Only on 3+ lane motorways, but always a returner anyway.

EDIT> just reading here other comments, using the indicators and other "rules" should be used by common sense due to safety issues on yerself when operating any motor vehicle (wind, jet prop, whatever), not whether its mandatory or no.

vibe666

When you make a habit of doing it all the time, even if there's nobody for miles around, you'll end up doing it subconsciously without thinking about it and be much less likely to forget to do it when it's actually needed, whether you realise it or not, such as if someone is in a blind spot or when you just don't notice them for whatever reason.

_Kaiser_

Yes.. always! Regardless of the type of road.

Once again though I find myself shocked by some of the answers to such a basic/common sense question and yet not surprised given the muppetry I encounter on the roads.

This thread and others like it do make the case for frequent retesting of ALL drivers all the stronger though.

Popoutman

I'll indicate always for a change of lane. I'll indicate correctly and in time to start an overtake. I will rarely indicate for the completion of an overtake.

(Pedantic mode on.) I don't consider a re-merge on a single carriageway as a lane change as it's an overtaking manoeuvre - I haven't changed lane as I don't have a valid lane to change to. I'll indicate for the start of the overtake as that's appropriate for the circumstances as well as being on the statute books.
Performing the same road manoeuvre on a dual carriageway or other multi-lane road involves me moving to a different and valid lane therefore it's a lane change, and gets indicated appropriately.(Pedantic mode off)

It's one of those rather ambiguous situations where one thing makes sense to one group and not doing it makes sense to another. Similar to what do you do if you are in freely-moving but heavy traffic going at e.g. 60ph, when the car in front of you indicates to turn right? Do you indicate left, and move to the left, suggesting to the car behind that you are turning left, and the driver behind may start to edge to the right to avoid you and rear end the car actually turning right? Do you instead take up a left-hand road position allowing the car behind to see the car in front indicating to the right? Do you hit the hazards for one or two flashes? All these courses can be explained and validated as correct..

AlanMcC23

I only do it if the car behind me before i overtake the car in front is a squad car :P other than that i never do it seems pointless to be honest

K.Flyer

Whatever about using indicators (a signal to INDICATE your intention to other road users) its the muppets that don't cancel their indicator and drive for miles with it flashing away that really grates my bones.
Edit:
I should have mentioned I indicate for almost any change of direction, I never rely on others to second guess what I am up to.

_Kaiser_

Popoutman wrote: »

(Pedantic mode on.) I don't consider a re-merge on a single carriageway as a lane change as it's an overtaking manoeuvre - I haven't changed lane as I don't have a valid lane to change to. I'll indicate for the start of the overtake as that's appropriate for the circumstances as well as being on the statute books.
Performing the same road manoeuvre on a dual carriageway or other multi-lane road involves me moving to a different and valid lane therefore it's a lane change, and gets indicated appropriately.(Pedantic mode off)

[REALLY pedantic mode on]

But you ARE changing lanes.. you're moving into the oncoming lane which IS valid (as long as the road markings permit it) for the duration of the manoeuvere

As such when you move back (and by your own logic) you should be indicating as well

[/REALLY pedantic mode]

In any case, the idea of using those flashing orange lights is to indicate your intentions to other road users. Given the poor standard of driving out there generally it can only be a good thing to remind some of these muppets what you're up to lest they do something stupid!

For example.. when driving through the city centre in Dublin - among taxis that randomly pull in and out of bus lanes or stop suddenly in the middle of the road to pick up a fare, buses that will cross 2/3 lanes in one move, bikers and cyclists weaving between traffic and of course other car drivers - I will ALWAYS indicate in good time and wait a few seconds (I don't mean stop) before I move. It's what I call letting everyone get used to the idea first! Plus it encourages others to give way/let you in rather than trying to force your way in at the last second.

aloyisious

Indicate, indicate, indicate. Besides the O/Motorist, pedestrians and cyclists and O/P's coming the opposite direction like to know what your next move is.

MaxFlower

bigroad wrote: »

I have to agree.It amazes the amount of sloweys that flash when you overtake them ,as if you should stay behind them till they see fit to raise their speed from zero.

Not a slow driver but I flash drivers that overtake me when, on their return to the same lane, they try to brush the dead flies off my front bumper. I estimated once that one car allowed 3-4 feet between us as they re-merged at 95km/h on the motorway. No problem with being overtaken, just don't want to be swapping paint/wing mirrors with anyone.

spurious

I find it useful to wait until the car I'm overtaking appears in my rearview mirror, not just the side one. Then I know I'm far enough ahead of them not to irritate them.

YbFocus

spurious wrote: »

I find it useful to wait until the car I'm overtaking appears in my rearview mirror, not just the side one. Then I know I'm far enough ahead of them not to irritate them.

Thats the rule I follow also, if you can see it there then it is definitely far enough back

vibe666

spurious wrote: »

I find it useful to wait until the car I'm overtaking appears in my rearview mirror, not just the side one. Then I know I'm far enough ahead of them not to irritate them.

Always a good rule of thumb, once you can see the front of their car in your rear view mirror, you know you're safely in the clear.

flazio

On a dual carrigeway, motorway, I always indicate whenever I'm changing lanes, regardless of the reason for the lane change.

MaxFlower

Good idea for the people that have trouble judging, I like the rear view mirror idea. I tend to use the side mirror but I also tend to overcompensate.

BTW, now that I think about it I find that on motorway I do indicate to return to the inside lane but I don't on single carriageway. Maybe I'll start again.

djimi

I indicate left not to show that Im moving back in, but when I intend to move back in. I would always leave plenty of room when moving back in after overtaking, but the way I see it its no harm to give advance warning anyway; its always best not to startle people...

challengemaster

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

[REALLY pedantic mode on]

But you ARE changing lanes.. you're moving into the oncoming lane which IS valid (as long as the road markings permit it) for the duration of the manoeuvere

The maneuver is valid, the lane however is not.

If you were asked which lanes can you travel in while heading northbound on the M50, you wouldn't include the lanes on the southbound side as you're committing an offense by driving on the wrong side of the road. Same logic applies to single carriageways. If you cannot continuously travel in that lane without committing some traffic offense, it's not a valid lane for travelling in.

Or another way to look at it: You are obliged to drive on the left, therefore the right side of the road is not a valid lane to travel in.

The common sense that you will return to your own lane (moving left) is even in the statutes:

S.I. No. 294/1964: wrote:

" overtaking " includes passing out, and cognate words shall be construed accordingly ;

Obligation to drive on the left and to use traffic lanes
17.—(1) A driver shall drive as near to the left hand side of the roadway as is necessary in order to allow, without danger or inconvenience to traffic or a pedestrian, approaching traffic to pass him on his right and overtaking traffic to overtake him on his right.


19.—(3) A driver shall overtake on the right and shall not move in towards the left until it is safe to do so.

Scartbeg

I virtually never indicate when pulling back in, what purpose does it serve to the person I have just passed? Exceptions being where I can see someone coming up behind me at speed, to indicate that I will be moving over to let them pass, and on single lane roads where someone is approaching from the other direction and needs reassurance that I am about to clear their lane.

The Institute of Advanced Motorists puts emphasis on observation, anticipation and situational awareness rather than driving on autopilot. And giving a signal at all times is driving on autopilot. The main difference from indicating blindly is that it actually gives some thought to the presence of other road users.

And I tear my hair out every time I have someone overtake me and give one flash of the indicator when they are already half-way back into the left lane. WHAT IS THE POINT! If the intention is to give me warning of their impending manoeuvre, then they are 5 seconds too late!

_Kaiser_

challengemaster wrote: »

The maneuver is valid, the lane however is not.

If you were asked which lanes can you travel in while heading northbound on the M50, you wouldn't include the lanes on the southbound side as you're committing an offense by driving on the wrong side of the road. Same logic applies to single carriageways. If you cannot continuously travel in that lane without committing some traffic offense, it's not a valid lane for travelling in.

Or another way to look at it: You are obliged to drive on the left, therefore the right side of the road is not a valid lane to travel in.

The common sense that you will return to your own lane (moving left) is even in the statutes:

There's no comparison between the M50 and a 2-way single carriageway road with a broken line in the middle - not least because the M50 has a concrete barrier separating it! No offence is committed by entering the oncoming lane on the single carriageway to overtake a slower moving vehicle providing the road markings permit it thus being there is entirely valid for the duration of the overtake.

I'm not quite sure what your point is regardless, unless it's trying to justify a lack of common sense during such a move by quoting from the vagaries of law, which is interpreted in different ways on a daily basis by judges and solicitors and is not meant as a suicide pact hence being open to such interpretation in the first place.

Bottom line is that signaling your intentions to other traffic around you is ALWAYS a good idea.

mags1962

I had to overtake a Garda car on the N7 when he comes down a slip road and trundles along at about 97 kmh in the driving lane. I of course pulled out and accelerated to just over 100 kmh to get past, indicated back in and pulled in in front of him about 45 metres away and he then flashed me???
I saw him flash me as I was looking in my rear view mirror as I made sure I was far enough past to pull back in. I continued to keep an eye on him but he didn't do anything else and I was wondering why he flashed in the first place. he soon left the motorway but where are the feckers when the three lanes are all travelling at the same speed and the most empty lane is the inside driving lane?

chicorytip

Not necessary. When you see the vehicle behind
in the middle of your rear view mirror it's safe to
re-enter the left lane.

challengemaster

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

There's no comparison between the M50 and a 2-way single carriageway road with a broken line in the middle - not least because the M50 has a concrete barrier separating it! No offence is committed by entering the oncoming lane on the single carriageway to overtake a slower moving vehicle providing the road markings permit it thus being there is entirely valid for the duration of the overtake.

How did I know I'd get that response.

The funny thing is you're saying the same thing yourself. It's valid to use that lane for the duration of the overtake. Not indefinitely. You don't continue driving on the wrong side of the road until you reach your destination. Hence it's illogical to signal moving back, because what else would you do?

Dermot Illogical

I once did an advanced driving course and it was drilled into us not to indicate pulling back in.

aloyisious

I like this one.