Horse wrote:hir wrote: ... which satisfies the mantra... "the furthest point on the surface of the road seen to be clear, and likely to remain so".
@hir any idea where you picked it up from?
I could only have been picked it up from police class 1 drivers; on different occasions and from different officers. It’s a mystery as to why it’s not in Roadcraft (I’ll check to see if it’s in earlier editions). However, it is undoubtedly taught in some, perhaps all, police driving schools.
The way I view it is the actual, physical, limit point maybe 300 yards away, but there maybe children on the nearside pavement about 200 yards away, they are larking about and not paying attention to the traffic, they have a loose dog with them. So, my virtual limit point is at 200 yards. By assessing the risk based on “likely to remain so” I have moved the limit point, and the distance in which I must be able to stop, closer than the physical limit point.
Now, we all know it’s not quite as simple as that. Using IPSGA, I might choose to move the car away from the nearside, to a place of safety away from the children, I might ease off the speed to ensure I can stop if child or canine step into the road. But what the mantra “and likely to remain so” has done is to make me consider potential hazards before I even get to the physical limit point at the bend. You may say that’s just part of the process of applying the “system”, and I wouldn’t disagree, but the mantra ensures that one doesn’t become target focused on the physical limit point.
Hope that helps.