Yesterday, as I was driving home, for a bit of a change I was in the left of two lanes joining a roundabout, and the person in the right hand lane cut across me(usually happens when I'm, in the inside lane), had I not been hanging back in the general expectation of something daft happening I would have a lovely dent now.
This has got me to thinking:
The reason I wasn't in a crash is because I was driving defensively, keeping extra space between me and other vehicles in case one of them did something idiotic.
Now I pretty much always drive like this, because I have to. If I didn't I reckon I'd be in at least one crash (albeit minor ones) a week. people cut corners, cross white lines, wander from lane to lane, all sorts.
Now there are lots of other people out there who also don't have crashes every week, so does that mean that we all drive defensively? Do you all find yourself looking out for the next p****** trying to insert his car into yours?
I am by no means the perfect driver, but the unthinking idiocy that you see going on around you all the time is quite breathtaking when you stop to think about it.
As a gut reaction to it, I've always thought to myself that 'most' of the people on the road shouldn't be there, they're dangerous, but following my new defensive driving theory I suppose it makes sense to think that there are a small minority of these 'bad drivers' (but obviously you tend to notice them a lot more than the safe ones). So this type of traffic prangs come about either when two of them meet, so they're not being protected from themselves by a defensive driver, or a defensive driver makes an honest mistake, slips, blinks at the wrong time, whatever.
Sorry if this isn't very cohesive, I'm basically just thinking aloud here, but I thought it'd be interesting to hear the backrooms views on the matter.
|
I try very hard to drive ni just the manner you describe. It's not always easy and like most humans I do occasionally cock it up.
Touch wood, I've not had any motoring type accidents for a large number of years. About 15 at the last count. Altho' I did reverse my GTV into a post while in Northern Italy last year, does that count?
JaB
|
I apply to the driving environment the idea I find trustworthy in all environments: most people don't think most of the time.
My current puzzle is why so many drivers don't think it worth indicating when they cross the centre line to pass parked cars, cyclists, etc. It would be more than a little mutually beneficial to know in advance that oncoming traffic needs to share the carriageway on which you're driving.
|
I deliberately don't indicate when doing such a manoeuvre with parked vehicles as can confuse other road users. They think you are about to turn right rather than going round parked cars. When faced with other cars doing the same and they start to move over I make sure I am as far left as practicable so they fit in. You don't have to use an indicator to make your intentions clear when passing parked cars as moving out to the crown of the road in good time gives that message better than an indicator and is less confusing, particularly if there is someone waiting to turn out into the road in a nearby junction. They could think that indicator meant the person was turning off not just passing parked cars and pull out in front of them. If I have to stop then I'll stick on my indicator or some numpty will barge passed as they have not realised I am waiting for a gap to go round the parked car in front.
Indicating when passing a cyclist depends on the width of the road, whether there are junctions and whether there is oncoming traffic and to some extent whether I remember!
teabelly
|
|
|
|
|
You were obviously forgetting to leave an extra gap between the post and your car in case it did anything stupid, but since you were on holiday it's not surprising you weren't properly focussed. I'm sure we can forgive you.
|
You were obviously forgetting to leave an extra gap between the post and your car in case it did anything stupid, but since you were on holiday it's not surprising you weren't properly focussed. I'm sure we can forgive you.
Cheers m8
Actually, I hit the top rail which extended beyond the post by about 8 inches consequently no damage to bumper but a big ding in the lovely profile of my boot lid :(
JaB
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO, I think there are a lot of people who do cut corners etc. because "defensive" drivers let them.
As an example, I regularly use the northbound A217 from the M25. At the roundabout at Tadworth, three lanes approach it with the inside lane for the first, second and third exits (the third being the continuation of the A 217), the middle lane solely for the third exit, and the outside lane for the fourth exit (and the fifth exit for those wishing to go back from wence they came!).
Many, many drivers in the inside lane drift towards the middle lane, with those in the middle drifting to the outside (which is rarely used), then they all drift back again approximately level to the second exit. Not a problem until you DO get a car in the outside lane. When this happens, I usually find a quick toot on the horn when the inside lane starts to drift over keeps them in check! Also, as the resident party-pooper, I don't join in with the lane drifting as there have been occassions when cars have drifted to the outside lane only to find those in the middle now staying there.
A long, rambling example, I know, but I'm sure that there are plenty of similar examples out there. It does seem that many drivers pick up these bad habits because the "better" drivers accomodate them.
|
|
Interesting poitn Myles, the problem is that in a lot of cases, if I didn't let them, I'd have a great chunk out of my car.
|
Exactly. Usually I drive in such a way as to accommodate others' stupidity. On occasions when I try to close the door on someone doing something cheeky or stupid, they just go through it anyway. But I'm sure it's getting worse. When I first passed my test (roughly a decade ago) I remember having to be careful to give lorries plenty of room to swing round roundabouts. These days I'm having to do the same thing for Ford Mondeos.
There's nothing that riles me more than predicting someone's stupidity and having them prove me right.
|
|
There's nothin that pleases me more than predicting someone's stupidity, allowing for it and being proved right.
|
Verily we have a prophet in our midst. Pray, from whence doth your powers come?
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
|
|
I was taught to drive, too many moons ago, by an ex-police instructor and his maxim was, 'always assume that everyone else on the road is a total idiot, make allowances and you will never be disappointed when they prove you right.' Has proved to be not too far wrong over the years.
He also added that if you are on two wheels you should add 'and is trying to kill you' after total idiot; saved my bacon several times in my biking days.
Personally I get quite a kick out of second guessing someone and preventing a collision because I was aware and concentrating, I certainly don't regard it as being 'weak'.
Cockle
|
|
|
|
|
Great minds must think alike ;-) I was just musing on this earlier. How would you describe such driver interaction in statistical terms? How about this:
- when two non-defensive drivers meet on the road, the probability of them having a close encounter must be the *sum* of their individual probabilities to attempt one ;-)
- when a defensive driver and a non-defensive driver meet, the probability of a crunch is more like the *product* of their individual likelyhoods to cause one, i.e. almost zero because the defensive one is actively compensating for the other's errors!
It could well be that the defensive driving behaviour is the single most important 'knob' in our road safety system. I think the above easily applies to pedestrians, cyclists etc as well.
arthurdent
|
Arthurdent, not sure how you reckon two defgensive drivers adds (or mutiplies!) trouble. Two drivers, each giving the other lots of room. Each considers both what the other driver should do, and what the other might do if they make a common mistake.
From a young age, I was taught this by my father about indicators. If a car indicates to turn, don't assume it will: give it space to do so, but be prepared for it not to turn. Similar logic if a car approaches a junction without indicating: don't rule out the possibility that it may turn.
I can't really see how that can lead to a crunch.
|
|
Sorry NW, think you've misread that post, Arthur was talking about NON defensive drivers.
|
The best piece of advice I ever heard on driving was that what other people do on the road is none of your business. The only person responsible for the safety of you and those sharing the road with you is yourself, it is your duty to drive in a manner which compensates for the errors of others.
None are perfect, we all make mistakes but if that attitude was instilled into everyone from day one of their driving, speed cameras would never have been needed or even heard of.
|
|
|
|
bazzabear, you're right -- I entirely misread it. Sorry arthurdent!
|
|
|
|
Arthur's point is exactly the opposite...
For instance, two clueless drivers on mobiles meet at a dangerous bend. Each has a one in ten chance of wandering far enough over to hit the other... express this as a decimal and you get 0.1 + 0.1 = 0.2, i.e., a 20% accident risk.
Two defensive drivers meet on the same bend. Each is driving defensively, so is prepared to react to the 0.1 accident factor, so 0.1 × 0.1 = 0.01, i.e., a 1% accident risk.
It's a bit of dodgy maths and I'm sure the numbers are far too big, even if it's not, but you have to take the point that multiplying fractions makes smaller numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
