SLOW driving is DANGEROUS

[Cyclone]

edit - duplicate post

[Cyclone]

No, offence is nothing to do with it. It's dangerous if it makes it likely that other people will overtake (even if they do so safely).

These other examples also increase the danger, but they have no option about it, so there's little point in complaining, it's not poor driving when it's a milk float, it's just the way it is.

Slow cars increase the danger when they have an option not to do so (unlike the other examples).

 

PS - this isn't about unsafe overtaking, even a safe overtaking manoeuvre, carefully considered and executed is more dangerous than not having to overtake the slow vehicle.

[DT Ralge]

No, offence is nothing to do with it. It's dangerous if it makes it likely that other people will overtake (even if they do so safely).

These other examples also increase the danger, but they have no option about it, so there's little point in complaining, it's not poor driving when it's a milk float, it's just the way it is.

Slow cars increase the danger when they have an option not to do so (unlike the other examples).

 

PS - this isn't about unsafe overtaking, even a safe overtaking manoeuvre, carefully considered and executed is more dangerous than not having to overtake the slow vehicle.

 

But you (choose to) miss my point. "it's not poor driving, it's just the way it is" can and should be ascribed to whatever driving styles or attributes you come across out on the road.

An unthinking response (e.g. I'll overtake this, why is he driving so slow?) stems, perhaps, from a poor attitude and/or an inflexible driving plan ("this journey should take me x minutes").

We don't, as drivers, come in a uniform standard of competence or confidence - in your words, it's just the way it is so get on with it and arrive safely and non- judgementally for the slow driver may well have very good reason for taking it steadier than you'd like today. Tomorrow, he might be with the fast boys.

[L00b]

In theory yes. But theory isn't practice obviously, and actually dealing with aquaplaning or a skid is something you just have to learn through experience.

Goes without saying, but 'experience' is acquired quicker (and, very importantly, more safely) when you can understand what is happening:

• theory: 'this is what aquaplaning is and how you counter it'
  
• experience: 'WTF is happening?' > 'Oh yeah, that's aquaplaning' > 'release go pedal, do not brake, keep straight'

We're not talking advanced driving techniques, Cyclone. This is everyday/any car/any place stuff.

Do other countries require you to go on a race track and practice controlling a skid?

I believe Scandinavian countries do (for very obvious reasons), but I could be mistaken (hearsay from a Swede, aeons ago).

 

In France, on at least one practical training session, the instructor pulls the handbrake at approx 20 mph (straight line, and very obviously well away from major public thoroughfares). That's not the 'controlled emergency braking' training session either. The purpose is to see whether the trainee keeps it together (maintains car course), or just panics and "lets go of everything" (wheel, pedals, etc.).

 

At least, this thread has helped me understand a great deal more about the apparent standard of driving on British roads

[Cyclone]

But you (choose to) miss my point. "it's not poor driving, it's just the way it is" can and should be ascribed to whatever driving styles or attributes you come across out on the road.

No not really.

The speed of a milk float can't be altered.

Driving slowly however can, it's a choice something that can be changed.

An unthinking response (e.g. I'll overtake this, why is he driving so slow?) stems, perhaps, from a poor attitude and/or an inflexible driving plan ("this journey should take me x minutes").

I haven't talked about an unthinking response. It's reasonable and expected that you will overtake slow moving obstacles. That doesn't mean that overtaking hasn't increased the danger, even a safe overtake is less safe than not overtaking.

We don't, as drivers, come in a uniform standard of competence or confidence - in your words, it's just the way it is so get on with it and arrive safely and non- judgementally for the slow driver may well have very good reason for taking it steadier than you'd like today. Tomorrow, he might be with the fast boys.

We do however all have to achieve a minimum standard of competence, and that includes driving at close to the speed limit when conditions allow in your driving test (or you'd fail). So there's no excuse for not doing the same thing (and in fact doing the exact opposite) after you've got your license.

[Cyclone]

Goes without saying, but 'experience' is acquired quicker (and, very importantly, more safely) when you can understand what is happening:

• theory: 'this is what aquaplaning is and how you counter it'
  
• experience: 'WTF is happening?' > 'Oh yeah, that's aquaplaning' > 'release go pedal, do not brake, keep straight'
  

We're not talking advanced driving techniques, Cyclone. This is everyday/any car/any place stuff.

You asked whether UK drivers were taught about it, the answer is yes.

I believe Scandinavian countries do (for very obvious reasons), but I could be mistaken (hearsay from a Swede, aeons ago).

 

In France, on at least one practical training session, the instructor pulls the handbrake at approx 20 mph (straight line, and very obviously well away from major public thoroughfares). That's not the 'controlled emergency braking' training session either. The purpose is to see whether the trainee keeps it together (maintains car course), or just panics and "lets go of everything" (wheel, pedals, etc.).

Interesting, we don't have the equivalent in the UK, you'd have to find an empty car park and try that yourself, but of course the drivers who are scared are very unlikely to do that.

 

At least, this thread has helped me understand a great deal more about the apparent standard of driving on British roads

 

It doesn't seem that the training is massively different to be honest.

[SnailyBoy]

We do however all have to achieve a minimum standard of competence, and that includes driving at close to the speed limit when conditions allow in your driving test (or you'd fail). So there's no excuse for not doing the same thing (and in fact doing the exact opposite) after you've got your license.

 

You'd of course apply the same scrutiny to a speeder too?

[alchresearch]

So where do electric milk floats come into this? They're slow by definition, so have they ever been banned if they're so unsafe and force people to overtake?

[Deltic]

No, offence is nothing to do with it. It's dangerous if it makes it likely that other people will overtake (even if they do so safely).

These other examples also increase the danger, but they have no option about it, so there's little point in complaining, it's not poor driving when it's a milk float, it's just the way it is.

Slow cars increase the danger when they have an option not to do so (unlike the other examples).

 

PS - this isn't about unsafe overtaking, even a safe overtaking manoeuvre, carefully considered and executed is more dangerous than not having to overtake the slow vehicle.

 

My bold

 

Exactly how much more dangerous? Do you have any statistics for increased risk whilst overtaking?

[Waldo]

Safe overtaking, by definition, cannot be dangerous.

 

What's more dangerous; slow drivers, or impatient drivers who overtake them, when it's not safe to do so?