On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Steve Smith
I'll clarify what I meant. I'm on a road with a single lane in each direction. There's an obstacle in my lane on the left, for example a parked car or a cyclist. I won't indicate to pbutt this obstacle; instead, as I approach it I will position myself sufficiently to pbutt it, and then move back over to the left when the object is moving away from me in my mirror.
Indicating for the above is now clbutted as unecessary by the DSA, while ten years ago it was taught as standard. The road position alone is now considered sufficient in normal situations.
On a road with two lanes in my direction of travel, if I encounter the same kind of obstacle to the left then I'll normally indicate and change lanes completely, and then indicate and change back afterwards (unless I was planning to get in that right lane anyway of course). This means that instead of the obstacle being something that needs pbutting, the whole thing just become a normal lane change. I feel this is much safer and less confusing than partly moving over to pbutt it into a parallel lane of traffic.
Yes, I would do the same where I felt it clarified the situation.
Aye, that was what I was describing above.
-- Chris
