Mirror, signal manoeuvre? Why?

Hagar

jhegarty wrote: »

Any chance you were indicating before looking ?

It's mirror, signal , manoeuvre in that order

Why that sequence?

Shouldn't we give as much time as possible for other motorists to see our signal? Obviously disregarding signalling way too early which causes it's own problems.

Isn't signal, mirror, manoeuvre not more appropriate?
You are going to turn regardless of what you see in the mirror, right?
What you see in the mirror naturally affects how you carry out the subsequent manoeuvre but should it delay you signalling your intent? I don't think it should. Also putting signalling between the mirror action introduces a small chance that something will happen behind you, while your attention is on signalling, just as you commence your manoeuvre. If you were to look in the mirror last thing it would eliminate that small chance and thus be more safe.

Personally I think the current phrase only exists because it's snappier to say.

Alanstrainor

I dont know about you, but when i learned to drive, and to this day, i follow the mantra, mirror, signal, mirror manoeuvre. Checking my mirror before signalling, means that i establish where other vehicles/cyclists etc are, signalling will show my intentions, checking mirror again will allow me to have a final check to ensure all is safe, and then finally manoeuvring.

shoelaceface

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I dont know about you, but when i learned to drive, and to this day, i follow the mantra, mirror, signal, mirror manoeuvre. Checking my mirror before signalling, means that i establish where other vehicles/cyclists etc are, signalling will show my intentions, checking mirror again will allow me to have a final check to ensure all is safe, and then finally manoeuvring.

i also learnt this system!

you can still follow this system and signal in plenty of time?

Heroditas

Hagar wrote: »

You are going to turn regardless of what you see in the mirror, right?

Well that certainly seems to be the case with some drivers, judging by the amount of accidents causing by people bullishly changing lanes and other cars plowing into them because they didn't have enough time to react.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hagar

Hagar wrote: »

You are going to turn regardless of what you see in the mirror, right?
What you see in the mirror naturally affects how you carry out the subsequent manoeuvre

Heroditas wrote: »

Well that certainly seems to be the case with some drivers, judging by the amount of accidents causing by people bullishly changing lanes and other cars plowing into them because they didn't have enough time to react.

I think you just reacted to the first sentence without reading the second.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Excellent response but I'm not entirely convinced.

Aren't we obliged to signal anyway in much the same way as we must stop for a red light at 3am although we think no one else is about? Since we must signal why not signal first, giving other road users a little extra time to observe our intent, then check the mirror then carry out the manoeuvre?

The point is moot however if my day to day observation of drivers is anything to go by. Some never signal at all, others signal only after they have started the manoeuvre in the now famous style of "look at me I'm turning".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Stark

Hagar wrote: »

Excellent response but I'm not entirely convinced.

Aren't we obliged to signal anyway in much the same way as we must stop for a red light at 3am although we think no one else is about? Since we must signal why not signal first, giving other road users a little extra time to observe our intent, then check the mirror then carry out the manoeuvre?

The point is moot however if my day to day observation of drivers is anything to go by. Some never signal at all, others signal only after they have started the manoeuvre in the now famous style of "look at me I'm turning".

You don't always carry out the manouvre regardless of what's going on around you. Like when changing lanes or pulling out, I'll wait for a gap before signalling my intentions to move out.

Hagar

If you signalled when there was no gap other motorists may create a gap for you to move into.

donegallfella wrote:

you could be charged with dangerous driving if you caused an accident by not signaling when you should have

My point entirely, always signal and as early as practicable, it is possible to have not seen an unlit cyclist for instance and your signal could be a literally make the difference between life and death.

Stark

Hagar wrote: »

If you signalled when there was no gap other motorists may create a gap for you to move into.

I'm guessing you don't live in Dublin

Well you might do if there was no gap, but if there was a gap, you'd probably wait. A decision made based on the mirror check.

Hagar

Not any more.

It's a theoretical question only. You can have the revolving lights from the tower at Dublin Airport nailed onto the roof of your car and nobody will let you out. The only way you will get out is if a driver of the same model car comes along and lets you out.

Thoie

Hagar wrote: »

Why that sequence?

Shouldn't we give as much time as possible for other motorists to see our signal? Obviously disregarding signalling way too early which causes it's own problems.

Isn't signal, mirror, manoeuvre not more appropriate?

I was taught Mirror, Signal, Mirror, Manoeuvre. One of the main reasons I can see for it (and why I do it) is because of your blind spots. Everyone in every vehicle has a blind spot somewhere.
Same example - two different scenarios:

1: Signal, mirror, manoeuvre:
I signal, then check my mirror, then I turn right. At the time when I checked my mirror, there was a motorbike in my blind spot coming out my outside - I smack into him.

2: Mirror, signal, mirror, manoeuvre:
I look in the mirror, see a motorbike coming up my outside, I signal, check my mirror again, notice that he's disappeared. I therefore assume that he's in my blind spot and wait a few seconds for him to pass me and then swing right, without smacking into motorbike.

In your example, let's say you consider "Turn -10 seconds" (10 seconds is a completely random number) to be the adequate amount of time for other motorists to see and react to your signal. You seem to be saying that using MSM, you'd look in your mirror at -10 seconds, then signal at, say, -8 seconds. I'd view it the other way that if -10 is the optimal time to signal, then you'd look in your mirrors at -12. That way the other drivers are getting the same amount of signalling time.

jamescc

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I dont know about you, but when i learned to drive, and to this day, i follow the mantra, mirror, signal, mirror manoeuvre. Checking my mirror before signalling, means that i establish where other vehicles/cyclists etc are, signalling will show my intentions, checking mirror again will allow me to have a final check to ensure all is safe, and then finally manoeuvring.

is there a way that i can write this down that i will remember that as i keep forgetting this and my test is on the 13/9

thanks