Checking your mirrors

[Cyclone]

What is directly behind you should have no bearing on your actions at all.

 

The onus is on all drivers to pay attention to what is in front of them. For instance, you can't consider what's behind you before you react to something in front of you, which may require you to slow down.

 

But knowing at all times what is behind you gives you some confidence and extra data when dealing with an emergency.

If I'm being tailgated by an HGV for example, then a straight line emergency stop is not going to help as the HGV will push me into whatever is there anyway.

 

I understand your point, if I want to accelerate I don't need to know who is behind me (unless you consider that perhaps they are thinking about overtaking). But having all around awareness enables better decision making.

 

---------- Post added 29-09-2015 at 14:34 ----------

 

Are you saying that if say a child suddenly runs into the road in front of you requiring you to brake immediately, you should first consider what's behind you??

 

If you get "rear ended" that is entirely the driver behinds fault for not allowing more stopping distance in front of him/her for such an eventuality.

 

You should already know. The actions you take will not be considered consciously, but that doesn't mean that they are made without thought.

 

---------- Post added 29-09-2015 at 14:34 ----------

 

Why is anyone arguing that they shouldn't be using their mirrors regularly?

It's bizarre. Perhaps this explains a lot of Sunday driving...

[Hots on]

Where did I say child above? I said "dog"

 

They are different.

 

If you suddenly clam your brakes on for a squirrel and get shunted by someone from behind you may be surprised as to what the police think about it!

 

i'm a bit confused by what you are saying. You said

 

"If you have something close behind you, and a small dog runs out, you are going to run over the dog. Safer than getting rear ended.

 

If there is nothing behind you, you brake for the dog. There may be a child following Rover trying to grab him..."

 

What if there is a child following Rover and there IS something behind you? do run over child and Rover?

 

---------- Post added 29-09-2015 at 14:45 ----------

 

Why is anyone arguing that they shouldn't be using their mirrors regularly?

It's bizarre. Perhaps this explains a lot of Sunday driving...

 

Unless I'm changing direction I don't feel the need to consciously/deliberately check what is directly behind me (though I probably do subconsciously all the time). I'm not going to run into something that suddenly appears in front of me while I'm considering what is behind me.

[DT Ralge]

What is directly behind you should have no bearing on your actions at all.

 

The onus is on all drivers to pay attention to what is in front of them. For instance, you can't consider what's behind you before you react to something in front of you, which may require you to slow down.

 

What's behind me as well as what's ahead of me determines lots of things:

- whether and when I show some brake lights (moving or already static), have I controlled him/her behind me as I slow to a stop, have I got an escape route?

- the timing of signal or no signal

- the timing of a lane change or no lane change

- my rate of acceleration on entering a higher limit (motor biker/BMW (...) setting me up as a target?

- etc

Why? The most common two-vehicle incident is the rear-end shunt, more often than not the greatest danger comes from the rear.

[L00b]

i'm a bit confused by what you are saying. You said

 

"If you have something close behind you, and a small dog runs out, you are going to run over the dog. Safer than getting rear ended.

 

If there is nothing behind you, you brake for the dog. There may be a child following Rover trying to grab him..."

 

What if there is a child following Rover and there IS something behind you? do run over child and Rover?

Having been in a similar situation (well, one that would set substantially the same conundrum, requiring a brake-or-drive-on decision within a fraction of a second) years ago, the answer is: you veer off road and control (and pray) best you can.

 

The kid jumped out in the middle of the road, between two cars, far too close to me: whether there was a car, bike or motorbike behind me was neither here nor there, there simply was not enough road left for me to brake to a stop before hitting him.

 

It cost me a new wheel and tyre at the time. I was lucky: the wheel took a stopping impact on a cast iron bollard, if I'd been driving any faster it would have ripped the whole front left axle.

Unless I'm changing direction I don't feel the need to consciously/deliberately check what is directly behind me

You might miss the approaching blue lights that are requesting urgent passage...or the runaway vehicle which all cars behind you have been swerving out of the way to let on through Edited September 29, 2015 by L00b

[RootsBooster]

What is directly behind you should have no bearing on your actions at all.

 

The onus is on all drivers to pay attention to what is in front of them. For instance, you can't consider what's behind you before you react to something in front of you, which may require you to slow down.

 

Rather an ignorant attitude to road safety.

Let me help you, with the aid of the Highway code...

 

"be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be

filtering through the traffic. These are more difficult to see than larger vehicles

and their riders are particularly vulnerable. Give them plenty of room, especially

if you are driving a long vehicle or towing a trailer"

[billycee]

Well, I'd always concentrate far more on what's in front of the road, but every 30 seconds or so glance quickly in the rear view mirror.

[Hots on]

Rather an ignorant attitude to road safety.

Let me help you, with the aid of the Highway code...

 

"be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be

filtering through the traffic. These are more difficult to see than larger vehicles

and their riders are particularly vulnerable. Give them plenty of room, especially

if you are driving a long vehicle or towing a trailer"

 

Not sure how this relates to what you're responding to.

 

All I'm saying is that you can only react to what's in front of you. You can't really do anything about what's behind you. If you get rear ended its because the driver of the vehicle that's rear ended you has failed in his/her responsibility to observe, treat and react to what's in front of them.

[truman]

Not sure how this relates to what you're responding to.

 

All I'm saying is that you can only react to what's in front of you. You can't really do anything about what's behind you. If you get rear ended its because the driver of the vehicle that's rear ended you has failed in his/her responsibility to observe, treat and react to what's in front of them.

 

If I see that someone is very close behind me I allow the gap to the car in front of me to grow..this gives me a larger space to brake into should the car in front stop..this in turn means I can brake more gently which gives the car behind more of a chance of stopping before he hits me..you can control things a little bit..

[DT Ralge]

Not sure how this relates to what you're responding to.

 

All I'm saying is that you can only react to what's in front of you. You can't really do anything about what's behind you. If you get rear ended its because the driver of the vehicle that's rear ended you has failed in his/her responsibility to observe, treat and react to what's in front of them.

 

Your fatalism with regard to what's happening behind you and to the risks posed to you by those behind is quite common.

 

On training, I'd give you two options:

Coming down a slip road and doing nothing other than stopping at the back end of the queue (without a care in the world or a glance to your rear). In another context, driving around the southern Tinsley viaduct roundabout intent on getting to the next red light and static queue around the corner asap again without a care in the world about those behind you.

OR slowing early, early brake lights and some space ahead (an escape route) just in case the muppet behind forgets where the brake pedal is.

First choice = cross your fingers

Second choice = manage your outcomes.

What will be your intelligent choice?

[mattleonard]

Not sure how this relates to what you're responding to.

 

All I'm saying is that you can only react to what's in front of you. You can't really do anything about what's behind you. If you get rear ended its because the driver of the vehicle that's rear ended you has failed in his/her responsibility to observe, treat and react to what's in front of them.

 

I'd have to vehemently disagree. As my driving instructor said to me back in the day, "mirrors to slow, mirrors to go".

 

His injunction of "mirrors to go", might seem particularly odd, until you consider a scenario such as that the person behind might be beginning an overtake (rightly or wrongly). If you then accelerate, that manoeuvre is going to be more prolonged than they anticipated; if there's oncoming traffic then you have a recipe for disaster. In comparison, "mirror to slow" is very straightforward.

 

You say that you can only react to what's in front of you. Why's that? What about a scenario where you're being tailgated. In that situation you should be gently increasing the distance between you and the car in front to ease the situation.

 

There's really not anything especially hard about checking mirrors; it's part of the driving test, so why is it reasonable to suddenly ditch it as soon as we've passed?

 

I'm with cyclone - the idea that it is being seriously argued that checking mirrors is unnecessary is frankly bizarre.