Indicating at a Cul de Sac? (Restricted test)

[explode64]

Quick question on the restricted test.

Do you have to indicate when you turn around in a Col de dac?

cheers

[ellipsis]

...the purpose of indicating is to make other road users aware of your intentions...unless you were doing a runner from the law and fucked up...then you wouldnt indicate, 'cos they would know what your intentions were..

[Maki]

...the purpose of indicating is to make other road users aware of your intentions...unless you were doing a runner from the law and fucked up...then you wouldnt indicate, 'cos they would know what your intentions were..

Oh, really? Seems like most drivers in NZ think the purpose of indicating is to let people know what they already did... Either that, or what they plan on doing next year. I see people drive through multiple intersections with the indicator on because they intended to make a turn at the 10th one....

[slofox]

...p...then you wouldnt indicate, 'cos they would know what your intentions were..

This assumes a degree of awareness in the observers...plus a modicum of intelligence that might allow them to process what their awareness is transmitting to them...You sure it would work?

[Bassmatt]

Quick question on the restricted test.

Do you have to indicate when you turn around in a Col de dac?

cheers

Cul de Sac? - Yes.

[Maha]

To answer the question........that would be no.

[Maha]

Cul de Sac? - Yes.


To answer the question........that would be no.

Conflicting replies....one of us must be wrong?

[ellipsis]

....maybe?..

[Maki]

If you are making a U turn, crossing one lane into another you must indicate. If you are making a turn in an area inside a cul de sac (the very end) that has been enlarged for the purpose of turning around, you do not have to indicate because you are not changing any lanes. I hope that makes it clear.

[p.dath]

This is the piece of relevant law:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/whole.html#DLM303071


(3) A driver who intends to turn or move to the right or to draw out from a kerb on the left side of the vehicle must signal for at least 3 seconds either—
(a) by means of an approved signalling device; or
(b) if an arm signal can be clearly seen from both the front and the rear of the vehicle, by extending the right arm directly outwards in a horizontal position

"Turn" is legally defined as:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/whole.html#DLM302191

Turn means to change direction; but if a roadway is marked with a centre line to show the normal path of vehicles,—
(a) a vehicle must be regarded as having turned if it leaves that path to enter another roadway or driveway or joins that path from another roadway or driveway; and
(b) a vehicle following the markings must not be regarded as having turned even though an intersection occurs at a point where the markings are laid out in a curve

My thoughts would be that you are in fact not turning, as you are not leaving the left hand edge of the road (assuming the cul-de-sac is unmarked). My thoughts are that it is not "drawing out" from the curve. So on both grounds, there would be no legal requirement to indicate if you are simply going around the cul-de-sac.



On a practical note, the intention of signalling is to let other drivers know what you are doing. Don't signal if you are going to confuse other road users. If your confused, then that is probably a good indication that your going to confuse them.

[tigertim20]

Conflicting replies....one of must be wrong?

If I was following someone straight down a cul de sac, and they didnt indicate, I would expect them to go up the driveway at the end, why else would they be going down a culdesac.

At the end of a cul de sac, you have to change direction, yes? So, Id indicate, as you will be changing direction at the end of your manouver.

[Usarka]

Is this a theoretical question or in reference to a practical test?

Unless it's got an island in it.... then I'd err on the side of caution and indicate. It's bascially a U-turn imho.

[Jantar]

Legal answer: A quick rule of thumb is that you indicate when changing from one road to another, or when crossing your lane marking (including the centerline). If the cul-de-sac has a centerline all the way to the end, then indicate. Otherwise just follow the left hand curb all the way around.

Practical answer: If there is a vehicle behind you then indicate so they know your intentions.

[CookMySock]

Conflicting replies....one of must be wrong?It doesn't matter.

I'd indicate, and I'd head-check it as well - for the purposes of the test, and for the purposes of saving my ass from some dickhead behind me who thought he'd just nip into his driveway in front of me instead of waiting.

[slofox]

It doesn't matter.

I'd indicate, and I'd head-check it as well - for the purposes of the test, and for the purposes of saving my ass from some dickhead behind me who thought he'd just nip into his driveway in front of me instead of waiting.

Perzackerly!

[Oakie]

I live in a cul-de-sac and it just seems right to indicate. I think your more likely to be failed for not indicating than indicating ... so definitely indicate. I'd argue about the rights and wrongs after you've got your licence.

[release_the_bees]

When I was learning to drive, the AA instructor taught me to indicate, so that would probably be the safest bet.

[blackdog]

It doesn't matter.

I'd indicate, and I'd head-check it as well - for the purposes of the test, and for the purposes of saving my ass from some dickhead behind me who thought he'd just nip into his driveway in front of me instead of waiting.

Jesus.

Hell has frozen over and pigs are flying tonight.

A sensible post from Mr Whippy!

[St_Gabriel]

I would clarify from the examiner before the test starts. They will know what they expect then you wont get it wrong. When I went for my restricted I asked about both feet down at a stop sign, he didnt care as long as the bike came to a complete stop, he even said no feet down if I was good enough (didnt try that one)

[CookMySock]

A sensible post from Mr Whippy!** points at the rep button.... :angry:

[FJRider]

To answer the question........that would be no.

You have to indicate in a roundabout ... why not in a cul-de-sac ... ??? :corn:

The other option would be stopping ... :yes:

[Maha]

You have to indicate in a roundabout ... why not in a cul-de-sac ... ??? :corn:

The other option would be stopping ... :yes:

I guess because the main difference would be, there would no others vehicles coming at you from the right in/on a cul-de-sac....would there?:corn:

[FJRider]

I guess because the main difference would be, there would no others vehicles coming at you from the right in/on a cul-de-sac....would there?:corn:

If nobody lived in any of the houses in that cul-de-sac ... maybe ... but you may be being followed by somebody that wants to turn into one of those houses driveways ... maybe ...

[warewolf]

If I was following someone straight down a cul de sac, and they didnt indicate, I would expect them to go up the driveway at the end, why else would they be going down a culdesac.

At the end of a cul de sac, you have to change direction, yes? So, Id indicate, as you will be changing direction at the end of your manouver.No. Read the post before yours, quoting the rules. "Entering a driveway" means making a turn, even if it is straight ahead. Following the end of the cul-de-sac around is following the markings (the kerb) around a curve so is not regarded as making a turn. Indicate only when turning.

I go up cul-de-sacs all the time, and come back down. It's called exploring, or just getting out on the bike,.

Legalities aside however, this dilemma invokes thoughts about the UK police rider training strategy, especially the bit "Information: take, use, give." That says be aware of those around you (take) consider their potential actions (use) and signal as necessary (give).

[warewolf]

You have to indicate in a roundaboutNo you don't; you only have to - like in a cul-de-sac - if you are turning.

Giving way at roundabouts (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/about-riding/giving-way-at-roundabouts.html).

[jazfender]

If I was following someone straight down a cul de sac, and they didnt indicate, I would expect them to go up the driveway at the end, why else would they be going down a culdesac.

to pick up babes? to turn around on a narrow street? to prepare the delorian before take off back the other way?

for any reason anybody goes up any street at any time? what happens if they don't indicate and TURN AT THE END!? instant lowside?

i would..

[FJRider]

No you don't; you only have to - like in a cul-de-sac - if you are turning.

Giving way at roundabouts (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/about-riding/giving-way-at-roundabouts.html).

LOOK at the 5th and 6th illustration yourself .. an indicated change of direction is required while you are in the roundabout ...

[Laava]

Really good question!
If you have metal knee armour, the sparks flying off it surely show that you are turning.

[warewolf]

LOOK at the 5th and 6th illustration yourself .. an indicated change of direction is required while you are in the roundabout ...... because you are turning (entry road to exit road).

[blackdog]

No you don't; you only have to - like in a cul-de-sac - if you are turning.

Giving way at roundabouts (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/about-riding/giving-way-at-roundabouts.html).

Anytime you use a roundabout, you will have to indicate at least once.

[varminter]

Whoa, lets go back a bit, cars have indicators?? when did that happen.

[baptist]

It doesn't matter.

I'd indicate, and I'd head-check it as well - for the purposes of the test, and for the purposes of saving my ass from some dickhead behind me who thought he'd just nip into his driveway in front of me instead of waiting.

I had that happen to me, I was indicating and a bike shot up a driveway as I went around the end of a Cul De Sac, odviously a SMIDSY moment, after all I was only driving a white long wheel base VW Crafter, easy to miss...:facepalm: good job the VW had big mirrors.


Whoa, lets go back a bit, cars have indicators?? when did that happen.

Yep.. good aye! and one day people will learn what they are for:innocent:

[Mystic13]

I'd go with indicate for the test. You lose nothing by doing that. Just like when I teach people to drive for the test they look in the rear vision mirror without moving their head, just their eyes as we all do. I teach them to do a little head movement for the test. Because the tester will check your eyes from time to time but if they look when you don't then they'll think you didn't look.

It's best to make this as simple as possible for them.

It's amazing that such a simple question can get 3 pages of responses. And counting.

[explode64]

Did the test today. I didn't end up using a cul de sac. Dude made me do a U turn on a narrow side street. Not easy on a RGV. :facepalm: But Passed :woohoo:

[oneofsix]

Did the test today. I didn't end up using a cul de sac. Dude made me do a U turn on a narrow side street. Not easy on a RGV. :facepalm: But Passed :woohoo:

Congradulations

[Maha]

Did the test today. I didn't end up using a cul de sac. Dude made me do a U turn on a narrow side street. Not easy on a RGV. :facepalm: But Passed :woohoo:

You mean you made us debate bullshit for fucking nothing?.....:blink:

hope you indicated while performing the u turn on a narrow road

[ellipsis]

...this would seem to indicate, that we are easily led..

[warewolf]

Anytime you use a roundabout, you will have to indicate at least once.In retrospect, I think you are right.

That road code page shows in the first picture, going straight through a single lane roundabout without indicating. However, under the heading 'Signal use at roundabouts' it says in every situation that indicators must be used, including in the situation in the first picture.

Typical mixed/confusing messages from the roading authorities!

[oneofsix]

In retrospect, I think you are right.

That road code page shows in the first picture, going straight through a single lane roundabout without indicating. However, under the heading 'Signal use at roundabouts' it says in every situation that indicators must be used, including in the situation in the first picture.

Typical mixed/confusing messages from the roading authorities!

I think the picture is trying to teach you you don't have to indicate when entering the round about to go straight through, don't confuse people by indicating left or right when that is not where you are going. But if you check the indicating to exit bit you will find when in the round about you always indicate your left exit at the entry immediately preceding your chosen exit, which also supports the rule that if you are going to go left at a round about you indicate left as you enter.

[MSTRS]

The number one rule regarding indicating in/on/at roundabouts is...
Don't believe other peoples' indicators.