Mirror Signal Manoeuvre

corktina

I was always taught MSM and that braking is a manoeuvre...has this changed? Many people seem to think you can brake first and then leave me guessing what they are doing for a while before signalling ( I realise using the mirror is no longer deemed necessary...)

Rant complete

Scortho

corktina wrote: »

I was always taught MSM and that braking is a manoeuvre...has this changed? Many people seem to think you can brake first and then leave me guessing what they are doing for a while before signalling ( I realise using the mirror is no longer deemed necessary...)

Rant complete

Definitely mirrors signal then slow down/brake.
Before turning check your mirrors again/blind spot to ensure no cyclist/ motorcyclist is overtaking.

YbFocus

No the current rule is the following:

- No signal or attention to the current situation.

- find where you're going and brake late, really late now stick it to the road.

Yes I am fed up of this as well

There is not one part of the irish driving mentality that doesn't need work.

TheChizler

Personally I do MMMMMMMMMMMMMwhateverMMMMMMMMM

Driveby Dogboy

But seriously, why isn't it signal mirror manoeuvre

TheChizler

Driveby Dogboy wrote: »

But seriously, why isn't it signal mirror manoeuvre

Avoids having to cancel indicators if you cant go which leads to confusion.

Why would you say you're going to go somewhere if you're not sure that place exists?

BMJD

what's a "signal"?

j/k I don't drive an Audi

Driveby Dogboy

Driveby Dogboy wrote: »

But seriously, why isn't it signal mirror manoeuvre

Something I've wondered aswell. If I plan to turn left, surely it makes more sense to signal at the earliest opportunity to let other people know your intentions?

If I check my mirror first, and see a cyclist or motorbike or whatever behind me, it's not going to make me not take the turn off that I intend to.

So with that in mind I think signal, then mirror, makes more sense.

Thoie

I was taught mirror, signal, mirror, manoeuvre. Where the second mirror stands for "use your mirrors and glance over the shoulder as well".

So check the mirror, does it look like I can do whatever, if so, signal, then before actually going, have another look to make sure a cyclist hasn't snuck up on you, or another car magically teleported into the space you were hoping to inhabit, or some other change of circumstances.

Of course, I was also taught to mow down random animals.

corktina

i'm shocked...of course you should check the mirror first to make sure what you are going to signal is safe to do....as a matter of fact, you should be checking the mirror constantly so that you know at any gven time what's happening behind you

If you signal first (lets say "right") there could be some guy overtaking you who will have to take swift avoiding action if you were to signal you were turning as he approached you. You check the mirror first to make sure that isn't happening

YbFocus

My thoughts also, you'd completely spook drivers and cause some dangerous situations.

keithclancy

Instructor told me to think of it as a common sense thing.

Look to see what your doing is possible / safe.
Use your indicator to let others know what you are going to do.
Check your mirror again to make sure its still possible.
Make your move looking in the direction you are travelling using your mirror and head.

Never put me wrong anyway.

biko

I just signal when I turn the wheel, the "better late than never" attitude..








joke

Valetta

It's a long time since I did the driving test, but I thought that "mirror, signal, manoevure" was just for pulling off from parked.

Like said above I would be constantly glancing in all three mirrors to know what's going on around me, so at any given time when about to make a trun or whatever I would already have "mirrored" before signalling.

Anan1

Deleted User wrote: »

If I check my mirror first, and see a cyclist or motorbike or whatever behind me, it's not going to make me not take the turn off that I intend to.

So with that in mind I think signal, then mirror, makes more sense.

Surely that depends on where it is?

_Kaiser_

I'm always watching the mirrors myself and will use the indicators on a deserted road at 2am if I'm turning or changing lanes, and even though I'll know there's nothing behind me I'll still look again anyway before I move.

But I know how the OP feels. There's a stretch on my commute where this happens all the time - at a turn into a petrol station, and a junction just beyond that

Mar4ix

clutch, lower gear, accelerator and clutch quick release, and goooooooo driftin ... everyone will know you wont go straight, so others will slow down, make sure youll finish your manoeuvrings :pac:

joke

anonanymore

biko wrote: »

I just signal when I turn the wheel, the "better late than never" attitude..








joke

Unfortunately this is the norm for a lot of drivers

Guy:Incognito

I've been noticing this a lot lately, was in the back of my head to post too. Driving behind a car then its brake, brake, brake, brake, brake then indicate and turn. Gob****es.

anonanymore

You've got that wrong, it's brake, brake, brake, brake, brake, turn then indicate.

BrensBenz

I thought that the trilby-hatted, blue-haired and the baseball-hatted, tattooed classes left indicating until the last nanosecond to save that special yellow electricity that goes into their yellow bulbs.

They're saving the planet so don't give them a hard time. Save that for the multi-taskers who think that using their indicators gives them the right of way, especially when they also display a Baby on Board sticker. Or the geniuses who believe that hazard warning lights allow you to park anywhere.

Mar4ix

also plenty of drivers who forget switch off indicator.... driving for miles with on, confusing others.

MugMugs

Mar4ix wrote: »

also plenty of drivers who forget switch off indicator.... driving for miles with on, confusing others.

Only in corolla's

Mar4ix

MugMugs wrote: »

Only in corolla's

seen a lot in golfs also

pajor

I've seen it happen on the Naas Road :pac:

Mar4ix

pajor wrote: »

[YOUTUBEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pezdwLmU2H4[/YOUTUBE]

I've seen it happen on the Naas Road :pac:

Seen a lot in city center and m50. Drivers usually veeery old people( could be up 90 ish years old ?? ), ... and me thinks they not really realize what they are doing.
No offense to old people though.

corktina

none taken

ciotog

Deleted User wrote: »

Something I've wondered aswell. If I plan to turn left, surely it makes more sense to signal at the earliest opportunity to let other people know your intentions?

If I check my mirror first, and see a cyclist or motorbike or whatever behind me, it's not going to make me not take the turn off that I intend to.

So with that in mind I think signal, then mirror, makes more sense.

I think it's because I mainly cycle that this scares me so. Why would it not stop you making the manoeuvre if there's a cyclist or motorcyclist behind you? I am curious because it's a reasonably frequent issue that I encounter, for example when cycling in the bus lane in the mornings some motorists will move out across my path (sometimes signalling, sometimes not). So I'm wondering about the decision to ignore me travelling along.

Ronnie Beck

indicators are great in theory. I use the force to know whats really going to happen.

Ronnie Beck

ciotog wrote: »

I think it's because I mainly cycle that this scares me so. Why would it not stop you making the manoeuvre if there's a cyclist or motorcyclist behind you? I am curious because it's a reasonably frequent issue that I encounter, for example when cycling in the bus lane in the mornings some motorists will move out across my path (sometimes signalling, sometimes not). So I'm wondering about the decision to ignore me travelling along.

Do you have the right of way? Indicators are largely a courtesy drivers pay to other road users. There presence or absence in only an indication of what may or may not happen.

serious3

Deleted User wrote: »

Something I've wondered aswell. If I plan to turn left, surely it makes more sense to signal at the earliest opportunity to let other people know your intentions?

If I check my mirror first, and see a cyclist or motorbike or whatever behind me, it's not going to make me not take the turn off that I intend to.

So with that in mind I think signal, then mirror, makes more sense.

its twats like you that cause accidents, as a motorcyclist this makes my blood boil along with other things. so you with your selfish attitude are prepared to kill or maim someone on a bike or cycle just because you want to turn right or left?? thanks a lot

Mar4ix

had nearly accident , when car on front of me turn left indicator and slowed down, as road was empty i thought goin overtake it , but in same second, car turn right ... my blood nearly boiled ....

ciotog

ciotog wrote: »

I think it's because I mainly cycle that this scares me so. Why would it not stop you making the manoeuvre if there's a cyclist or motorcyclist behind you? I am curious because it's a reasonably frequent issue that I encounter, for example when cycling in the bus lane in the mornings some motorists will move out across my path (sometimes signalling, sometimes not). So I'm wondering about the decision to ignore me travelling along.

I'm a former cyclist myself (I say former as i was never really into it as a sport or anything, more for convenience, but now that im driving im not on the bike as much anymore).

I'm very alert about cyclists and always check for them and make sure they're nowhere near me (what might be a small tap to me could kill them).


However, if I'm driving along a stretch of road, for arguments sake, we'll say we're on a main road and there's a turn off onto a side road (but the main road continues on past it), and I want to turn left, then I'm going to turn left.

The only likely thing to affect my decision, is an emergency vehicle on blues (in which case if my turning would impede this, I wouldn't do it).

However, if there's a cyclist behind me, I'm still going to turn left. His presence will have no affect on my decision to take the turn that I need to take in order to get to where I want to go.

So Instead of checking my mirrors and seeing the cyclist, and then informing him of my decision to turn, I think it makes more sense to indicate and let everyone know what I'm doing, and then check my mirrors to look for other road users, before moving on to making the manoeuvre.

That way the other road users get a longer heads up as to what I'm at, but I still get time to check for what I'm up against when making the turn.

Does that not make sense?

serious3 wrote: »

its twats like you that cause accidents, as a motorcyclist this makes my blood boil along with other things. so you with your selfish attitude are prepared to kill or maim someone on a bike or cycle just because you want to turn right or left?? thanks a lot

Are you confusing 'mirror' and 'manoeuvre'? I didn't say manoeuvre, mirror signal.

greenflash

The problem with indicating to change lane on an Irish motorway is that as soon as some bellends sees the indicator go on, they floor it and close the gap to stop you getting into their middle/outside lane.

corktina

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a former cyclist myself (I say former as i was never really into it as a sport or anything, more for convenience, but now that im driving im not on the bike as much anymore).

I'm very alert about cyclists and always check for them and make sure they're nowhere near me (what might be a small tap to me could kill them).


However, if I'm driving along a stretch of road, for arguments sake, we'll say we're on a main road and there's a turn off onto a side road (but the main road continues on past it), and I want to turn left, then I'm going to turn left.

The only likely thing to affect my decision, is an emergency vehicle on blues (in which case if my turning would impede this, I wouldn't do it).

However, if there's a cyclist behind me, I'm still going to turn left. His presence will have no affect on my decision to take the turn that I need to take in order to get to where I want to go.

So Instead of checking my mirrors and seeing the cyclist, and then informing him of my decision to turn, I think it makes more sense to indicate and let everyone know what I'm doing, and then check my mirrors to look for other road users, before moving on to making the manoeuvre.

That way the other road users get a longer heads up as to what I'm at, but I still get time to check for what I'm up against when making the turn.

Does that not make sense?





Are you confusing 'mirror' and 'manoeuvre'? I didn't say manoeuvre, mirror signal.

it's scary that I have to share the road with you, that's dangerous

jimgoose

Deleted User wrote: »

...Does that not make sense?...

No it does not. The MSM routine comes from the advanced driving school at Hendon Police College, where the whole philosophy (a.k.a. the system of car-control) is based around either knowing or being able to infer the position of all traffic around you at all times, especially before signalling for a maneuver.

jimgoose

corktina wrote: »

I was always taught MSM and that braking is a manoeuvre...has this changed? Many people seem to think you can brake first and then leave me guessing what they are doing for a while before signalling ( I realise using the mirror is no longer deemed necessary...)

Rant complete

It is a very good idea to do a mirror check before braking (emergency drop-anchor aside), as then if there's some fool who finds it necessary to hang a couple of feet off your back bumper, at least you know he's there. Likewise if there's someone just off one of the rear corners with the indicator on. The doctrine of "Don't Hit What's In Front Of You" hasn't completely percolated yet. Don't forget the brake light is a signal too - I often press the brake pedal just enough to trip the brake light switch when I don't need to "brake" per sé, just to let folk know what's going on.

Zubeneschamali

Fun game for boring trips: Try and say "Right" or "Left" out loud before the car in front turns on an indicator. You'll be surprised how seldom indicators tell you anything you didn't already guess.

Zubeneschamali

jimgoose wrote: »

I often press the brake pedal just enough to trip the brake light switch when I don't need to "brake" per sé, just to let folk know what's going on.

When coming off cruise control (traffic in front or a speed limit change) I could hit the Cancel button, but I usually use a tiny tap on the brake, just enough to cancel cruise and flash the brake lights, to let others know I'm slowing.

corktina

I try never to use my brakes...can't always do it but there should be no need to use your brakes to slow down on an open road,

ciotog

Ronnie Beck wrote: »

Do you have the right of way? Indicators are largely a courtesy drivers pay to other road users. There presence or absence in only an indication of what may or may not happen.

In the example I mentioned I talked about travelling in the bus lane, the motor vehicle changing lane would be in the lane to my right. So you can look at this in a couple of ways:
- The motor vehicle is entering a bus lane illegally; they have no right of way.
- Treat it as another lane; the motor vehicle is overtaking on the left so has to follow the rules for that. They have to give way to a vehicle (me) already in the lane.

I'm quite aware of the use or lack of use of indicators and for my own safety have come to a pretty good defensive style of cycling that accounts for other cues from drivers who may do something unexpected (for example the bus lane infringers often position themselves with their left wheels in the bus lane or on the lane marking for a time before their manoeuvre). The proper use of indicators though is well established by now so I do think it's reasonable that drivers consistently use them.

serious3

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a former cyclist myself (I say former as i was never really into it as a sport or anything, more for convenience, but now that im driving im not on the bike as much anymore).

I'm very alert about cyclists and always check for them and make sure they're nowhere near me (what might be a small tap to me could kill them).


However, if I'm driving along a stretch of road, for arguments sake, we'll say we're on a main road and there's a turn off onto a side road (but the main road continues on past it), and I want to turn left, then I'm going to turn left.

The only likely thing to affect my decision, is an emergency vehicle on blues (in which case if my turning would impede this, I wouldn't do it).

However, if there's a cyclist behind me, I'm still going to turn left. His presence will have no affect on my decision to take the turn that I need to take in order to get to where I want to go.

So Instead of checking my mirrors and seeing the cyclist, and then informing him of my decision to turn, I think it makes more sense to indicate and let everyone know what I'm doing, and then check my mirrors to look for other road users, before moving on to making the manoeuvre.

That way the other road users get a longer heads up as to what I'm at, but I still get time to check for what I'm up against when making the turn.

Does that not make sense?





Are you confusing 'mirror' and 'manoeuvre'? I didn't say manoeuvre, mirror signal.

not confusing anything, you said if you looked in your mirror and saw biker or cyclist and wanted to turn nothing would stop you

ABajaninCork

Never mind MSM - How about LOOKING before you decide to reverse!!!! :mad::mad::mad:

Twice today, my car was nearly hit by idiots reversing out on to the road (which you're not supposed to do!). In one case, even though I was going at speed and blew the horn to warn her, the stupid biatch STILL kept going!!

Since when does reversing traffic have the ******* right of way???

AAAAAHHHHHHH!!!

corktina

corktina wrote: »

it's scary that I have to share the road with you, that's dangerous

How!?

serious3

serious3 wrote: »

not confusing anything, you said if you looked in your mirror and saw biker or cyclist and wanted to turn nothing would stop you

Yes. Why would it? Unless the cyclist is right beside me (in which case by the time i'm slowing and near the turn they'd be far ahead of me anyway).


Pressing an indicator isn't equal to violently jerking the steering wheel to one side (as many here seem to think). If a cyclist can't react to an indicator then they should reconsider their competence.

corktina

Deleted User wrote: »

How!?

because if you stick the indicator on it can cause someone to take evasive action if you haven't first checked it is safe to indicate. If someone was fast approaching you to overtake, for instance,and suddenly you indicate right, it could create a dangerous situation. One thing you should always do on the road is to avoid making another driver have to change their speed or direction.

corktina

corktina wrote: »

because if you stick the indicator on it can cause someone to take evasive action if you haven't first checked it is safe to indicate. If someone was fast approaching you to overtake, for instance,and suddenly you indicate right, it could create a dangerous situation. One thing you should always do on the road is to avoid making another driver have to change their speed or direction.

So we'll say you're on a main road, and you want to, lets say, turn into your housing estate on the right.

If you look in your mirror and you see a car overtaking, what do you do? Continue on straight because he's overtaking and do a random drive around to get back to your housing estate again?

Of course not. You're still going to turn right anyway, you'll just slow down and wait for the car to pass you (or slow down and pull in behind you, depending on how far along he is in his overtaking). Either way your indicator is going on, so I think it makes more sense to give more notice to the other car that you're going to be turning right ahead..?

Thoie

Deleted User wrote: »

So we'll say you're on a main road, and you want to, lets say, turn into your housing estate on the right.

If you look in your mirror and you see a car overtaking, what do you do? Continue on straight because he's overtaking and do a random drive around to get back to your housing estate again?

Of course not. You're still going to turn right anyway, you'll just slow down and wait for the car to pass you (or slow down and pull in behind you, depending on how far along he is in his overtaking). Either way your indicator is going on, so I think it makes more sense to give more notice to the other car that you're going to be turning right ahead..?

Could you not just start everything a little earlier, check your mirror first, and then signal at the place you were planning in the scenario above? That way you don't give the car/bike on your outside a heart attack but still give everyone plenty of notice.

In general the kind of people who start indicating while I'm overtaking them are also the kind of people who have a tendency to follow the indication with an immediate drifting into their desired lane. You are obviously a marvellous chap, and carefully plan all your manoeuvres well in advance, but I can't tell that when I'm in your blind spot, and will have to assume the worst case scenario.

corktina

Thoie wrote: »

Could you not just start everything a little earlier, check your mirror first, and then signal at the place you were planning in the scenario above? That way you don't give the car/bike on your outside a heart attack but still give everyone plenty of notice.

In general the kind of people who start indicating while I'm overtaking them are also the kind of people who have a tendency to follow the indication with an immediate drifting into their desired lane. You are obviously a marvellous chap, and carefully plan all your manoeuvres well in advance, but I can't tell that when I'm in your blind spot, and will have to assume the worst case scenario.

exactly, you check your mirror in advance of the spot you would like to indicate right at.Why on earth would you attempt to turn right in spite of or in ignorance of an overtaking vehicle?

corktina

corktina wrote: »

Why on earth would you attempt to turn right in spite of or in ignorance of an overtaking vehicle?

Where have I said that anywhere the thread?!

Indicating ≠ Turning

Thoie

Thoie wrote: »

Could you not just start everything a little earlier

Obviously anyone with common sense would. The basic order of MSM is grand to me in general, but I think SMM should be thought in it's place. Anyone with their wits about them will have their eyes on their mirrors regularly as they drive anyway. There's only realistically, what, a second between completing the mirror and signal aspect anyway so in real life it doesn't make an enormous difference anyway (and most people don't bother indicating anyway, and they're not crushing cyclists left, right and centre, so I'm sure that we'll live on, anyway)


It's obviously just a difference of opinion. It's the over-reacting above that I find annoying (that makes it out that if you do SMM instead, what you're actually doing is stomping on the accellorator and violently steering into oncoming traffic, pressing the indicator near the end of the manoeuvr). :rolleyes: