Advanced Driving Hub

Gareth wrote: bothered me is when some use off-siding to mean something other than the literal interpretation.

In those cases, as far as I can make out, they mean being across the centre line when approaching a left bend with a limited view

Indeed, that's what I've understood others to mean when they have used the term. I must have heard it somewhere, but no idea where or who

How would you suggest that those users should differentiate between the various ways and reasons for crossing the centreline?

Horse wrote:How would you suggest that those users should differentiate between the various ways and reasons for crossing the centreline?

I suggest the onus is on them to make it explicit that they mean a very narrow interpretation of the words, rather than the general interpretation anybody else would make on hearing those words.

I mean, it's fundamental, isn't it; you shouldn't be using a piece of road if you can't see if it's safe to do so. So in what world does it make sense to re-interpret a phrase in a narrower sense to describe something that no-one in their right mind should be doing?

The IAM say ...

https://issuu.com/advanced_driving/docs/iam_spring18/46

https://www.iamroadsmart.com/media-poli ... fside-rule

What is not offsiding?

- Adopting a straight line through a series of bends where you have a clear view of the road and the road surface (road markings permitting) i.e. ‘The road is mine until the loss of vision in 400yds, my mirrors are clear so I am adopting a straight and stable course.’
- Opening up the radius of a bend where vision is available of any potential oncoming traffic or other hazards on a generally open road.
- Moving out to make a planned safe overtake and then finding yourself with a fantastic view which allows you to maintain your progress before returning to your own side of the road.

Given 'off-siding' is something that no-one should be doing, wouldn't it be better to use a phrase that conveys the issue rather than some mealy-mouthed re-interpretation that doesn't actually say what it means?

Because, otherwise, it just seems like jargon for jargons sake, designed to restrict knowledge to the initiated.

Gareth wrote:Given 'off-siding' is something that no-one should be doing

Personally, I think the benefits (of going offside for view on the approach to a left bend) are over-stated and there are associated risks.

However, I wouldn't go as far as saying ^ that.

For clarity, are you saying that (apart from overtaking, presumably) no-one should ever cross the centre line?

Horse wrote:For clarity, are you saying that (apart from overtaking, presumably) no-one should ever cross the centre line?

See, that's the kind of shit that happens when a perfectly good phrase with a simple meaning is subverted to mean something that's f'n stupid to be doing.

Reg's Video:

I was surprised at just how muddled Reg's video section on "off-siding" was.

The video is part of a series titled how to pass an advanced driving test. He is clearly demonstrating and explaining what is required to pass an IAM or RoSPA test. So, half way through his explanation of what IAM and RoSPA examiners are looking for when positioning on test, why does he go all... "let me talk to you about how we do extreme positioning in order to pass a police advanced driver course. Oh, and by the way, don't forget this is something YOU MUST NOT DO on an IAM or RoSPA test. No, No, No!"?

It had the feel of... "I'm getting bored with all this civilian stuff".

Of course there may have been a subliminal message embedded there along the lines of... "I can't tell you to do this on an IAM or RoSPA test, but once you've passed... wink, wink". Who knows? I don't.

IAM and RoSPA stance on "off-siding":

Their position is understandable. The last thing they want is the Sun/Mirror/Daily Mail reporting that a driver, who had been convicted of death by dangerous driving, stood up in court and pleaded mitigating circumstances along the lines of... "My IAM/RoSPA observer/tutor told me to off-side because he said it would help me to see further round corners". Well, not in this case it didn't, sunshine.

What to call "off-siding", if it's not to be called "off-siding"?:

I agree it's a bit confusing. "You can off-side to straight-line, but it's dangerous to off-side!", doesn't really make a lot of sense. However, I don't think there is a single-word substitute option. Presumably that's why the word "off-siding" persists. the phrase I usually use, and another poster has already mentioned it, is... "you can maintain the vision you have got, provided you can stop in the distance seen to be clear, but never go looking for vision". I usually add the rider that... "if you go off-side looking for vision all that you will see is the oncoming vehicle that's about to smash into you!" It's a bit of a mouthful, but it's better than having to stand up in court and explain that your erstwhile trainee completely got the wrong-end of the stick when you told him that "off-siding" was an accepted advanced driving technique.

Maybe you could call it positioning, or bold positioning, or maybe even extreme positioning. It doesn't matter what it is called so long as everyone knows what is being discussed. In some environments, some terminology may have a much more specific meaning. We are not in that environment so here, in this environment, it means what any normal person reading English would take it to mean.

From an examiner: "I clarified the perpetual issue regarding straight lining and off siding once and for all. The key is whether you can see if it is clear or not. If you can and are straightening the road through a twisty section that is fine but you shouldn't go out to obtain a view that isn't initially available."

Note: "straightening" does not necessarily require that the path is dead straight with no deviation. It means exactly what it says. i.e. straighter than it would otherwise have been.

Strangely Brown wrote:Maybe you could call it positioning, or bold positioning, or maybe even extreme positioning. It doesn't matter what it is called so long as everyone knows what is being discussed.

Some use numbers for positions within lane, or out of it.

I never have, so will leave it for someone else to elaborate.

Strangely Brown wrote:From an examiner: "I clarified the perpetual issue regarding straight lining and off siding once and for all. The key is whether you can see if it is clear or not. If you can and are straightening the road through a twisty section that is fine but you shouldn't go out to obtain a view that isn't initially available."

Agreed.

Better still if it's consistent across all examiners?

Strangely Brown wrote:Note: "straightening" does not necessarily require that the path is dead straight with no deviation. It means exactly what it says. i.e. straighter than it would otherwise have been.

And a fair expansion of the description.


Hey, look! Apparently I'm a shit-stirring wanker - but I agree with you. Oh dear, does that mean that you too ... ?

Gareth wrote:

Horse wrote:For clarity, are you saying that (apart from overtaking, presumably) no-one should ever cross the centre line?

See, that's the kind of shit that happens when a perfectly good phrase with a simple meaning is subverted to mean something that's f'n stupid to be doing.

Ok, thanks for clarifying: no-one should ever do it apart from when they do.

Glad we're clear now