Use of Indicator for Overtaking

[Edmund Kean]

Gareth

Forgive me, rather than dissect out snippets of text I shall just reply to your post towards me.

Actually, in the book John Lyon advocates cancelling the (intention to overtake) indicator when overtaking on a multilane carriageway before the wheels cross the lane division line system. Ergo, activate indicator four seconds before lane change and cancel indicator before right side wheels of your vehicle touch the line system… then proceed to move into lane to carry out the overtake.

The inference from your post, whilst on a single carriageway, suggests you have a propensity to cancelling an indicator before moving to the off side. You state your indicator conveys your ‘intention’ to overtake whilst on your side of the road. Indeed, this is the dialogue used in my oldish copy of the Highway Code. Perhaps you could convey what you believe you are communicating when you cancel your indicator prior to moving to the offside? It is my belief that having transitioned to the offside, I am still ‘intending’ to overtake and accordingly my indicator should be activated signalling and telegraphing as such. Only until I am safely alongside or passed the vehicle, does the status of intention change to that of overtaking - in other words the intention has been realised into a satisfactory action or manoeuvre and the indicator can now be cancelled.

As is the case with police forces, interpretation of how something should be performed from region to region in advanced driving and riding clubs differs. A very small percentage of drivers and riders on the UK roads are advanced trained. And, a minute percentage have ever done a High Performance driving course. For context, John Lyon was involved with the BSM HPC. I put it to you that the average motorist might find it confusing to witness your procedure for using an indicator when intending to overtake. The UK has a Highway Code and I would wager most driving schools do not advocate cancelling an indicator before moving to the offside intending to overtake. Please refer to the link.

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/using-t ... aking.html

If my intention to overtake was scuppered by a previously unseen feature or whatever or, a sudden change in circumstances, I would do what most other drivers would do… cancel my indicator and return to my side of the road.

[Gareth]

in the book John Lyon advocates cancelling the (intention to overtake) indicator when overtaking on a multilane carriageway before the wheels cross the lane division line system.

If the driver is holding roughly to the centre of their lane while indicating until it's clear other road users have understood, in starting to move across it's clear the driver is doing, no longer intending, no longer needing to indicate at the point the vehicle moves into the adjacent lane. I generally stop indicating when the front off-side wheel crosses the line.

The inference from your post, whilst on a single carriageway, suggests you have a propensity to cancelling an indicator before moving to the off side.

This is only for the rather special case where a following vehicle that might be be in play. In nearly all circumstances, the aforementioned excepted, I wouldn't indicate to overtake on a single carriageway. After all, what would be the point?

It is my belief that having transitioned to the offside, I am still ‘intending’ to overtake and accordingly my indicator should be activated signalling and telegraphing as such.

That's where we differ; I worry that by keeping the indicator on, should it even have been necessary, it could be seen as an invitation to the following vehicle to move up into the vacated space. It happens, whether or not we wish it. Having imagined such a possibility, one way to (very slightly) reduce the chance of it happening, is to not have the indicator on after having moved out.

Only until I am safely alongside or passed the vehicle, does the status of intention change to that of overtaking

Here is where I ask who benefits from the continued indicating? And, I should like to ask, would you habitually indicate to overtake on a single carriageway? Because if so, that's another point at which we differ.

I put it to you that the average motorist might find it confusing to witness your procedure for using an indicator when intending to overtake.

As mentioned above, I generally don't.

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/using-the-road-overtaking.html

It is clear and obscure in parts. It says to signal before starting the manoeuvre, but it says nothing about when to stop signalling, except where it describes [the] sequence as "Mirrors – Signal – Manoeuvre", which might as easily suggest signalling is done completed before the manoeuvre starts. There is a photo of a car passing a cyclist with the right indicator pointlessly on but no words to suggest that's a requirement.

[Triquet]

This is a fascinating thread, but the ultimate answer is "it all depends". I am not sure of the benefit that signalling gives from the POV of the overtakee, because I would suggest that some 50% of drivers haven't a clue as to what is behind them, and the first they know is when a car, motorbike (or HGV on the A34) barrels past them and they get a rude awakening

[Horse]

Is 'overtaking' the lateral movement, passing the other vehicle (s), or both actions?

If both, then surely 'intention to overtake' still applies during the lane change and closing up?

[Triquet]

If you change lanes and close up and for some reason abort, it's an aborted overtake. But rather like sailors and lee shores, don't get into that situation if at all possible.

[Horse]

If you change lanes and close up and for some reason abort, it's an aborted overtake. But rather like sailors and lee shores, don't get into that situation if at all possible.

Indeed, but better than continuing on

If you're moving out for that final check, it's still 'intention'.

[Gareth]

In the context of single carriageway overtakes and where it's necessary to indicate at all, I view indicating as telling other road users of my intention to move out.

Once I'm out, I've done which I'd intended and signalled. Moving out isn't ever a commitment to pass or, if it is, there's something seriously wrong in the planning. To my mind, indicating while passing has limited or no utility, although I'd be interested to read arguments to the contrary.

[waremark]

Being like Gareth a beneficiary of John Lyons on road training I find myself agreeing with all his comments here. Once I have moved offside the indicator seems to me to serve no further purpose.

Changing lanes on multilane roads I cancel my indicator at about the same point that many drivers apply the indicator - I see no point in using the indicator once the movement and position of the vehicle shows it is changing lanes. Of course this means I turn off lane change assist every time I start a new car!

[Edmund Kean]

... a quickly catching vehicle ... to let the other person know what I'm intending. If they've chosen to ignore it, I've bidden my time but, if there is a sign they're willing to wait for me to get on with it, then I've felt free to cancel the indicator and move out so that I can see if it's safe to continue

Could you clarify that, please.

It reads as
1. [Signal] to let the other person know what I'm intending
2. ... cancel the indicator
3. ... move out

If someone following you is looking to overtake cancelling your signal might appear as you having changed your mind - so potentially reassuring them that you would stay put, and encouraging them to overtake - possibly as you want to go for a look.

It would be handy if someone within the legal profession could give guidance upon a similar situation with Gareth's quote and Horse's thoughts - were there to be an incident (collision) along these lines, I wonder how ramifications of the litigious (litigious - if a motorcyclist where knocked off) kind would play out?

[Edmund Kean]

Once I have moved offside the indicator seems to me to serve no further purpose.

It must have been a wonderful experience for you both to be coached by John Lyon. You both (Gareth) are trenchant in your opinion upon this and I can understand... you are invested and it makes sense to you both. I'm curious, did you use the John Lyon procedure before your time in his company and if you didn't, do you remember how he explained it? By this I mean the supporting words to present the validity of cancelling the indicator before changing lanes.