It s worrying you abort a quarter of the times you make a decision to overtake ....
There are so many people crawling along and not pulling in to let the queues pass. It's sometimes safer to decline an overtake than to press ahead with it. It's those people who press ahead that end up causing oncoming traffic to have to brake hard.
There are a lot of very busy people around who really don't want to spend an extra half an hour a day stuck behind dawdlers.
worrying you don't accept the possibility motorbikes and cars do 100mph on 60mph roads...
Given the sharp bend at the top of the hill and the lower speed limit there, it would require a supercar or superbike to be accelerating at 100% to reach 100mph down that hill.
....worrying you don't realise average speed camera cables are cut in mine and no doubt other areas so cars and bikes can do 120mph plus on dubious 60 mph twisty bendy roads...
There is zero chance of taking the bend at the top of the hill at high speed. It's far too tight - any vehicle attempting it would fail to turn; cars would understeer and motorbikes would slide off or veer off into the hedge on the other side of the road.
...Deep down all drivers know a manoeuvre without 100 % clear line of vision is not a safe manoeuvre....
My line of sight was 100% clear when I made the decision. I was satisfied that the manoeuvre was safe.
and is a calculated gamble based on things like "they would have to be doing 100mph" etc and the really funny thing is....Its called an ACCIDENT when someone miscalculates !!
Simply getting in a vehicle is a gamble. There are plenty of ways an accident can happen, most of which are out of your control.
Strange thing to call it when 99.9% of the time blame can be apportioned !!!!!!!
OK, let's suppose an extraordinarily fast vehicle had somehow managed to maintain high speed through the sharp bend at the top of the hill (plus the other sharp bends just beyond - about three narrow S-bends in quick succession).
So does that make me the villain, when someone else is travelling at almost twice the speed limit and everything was safe when I began the manoeuvre?
What if there had been a long straight, but once I begin the overtake that proverbial Ferrari or superbike approaches me at 200mph?
Should I apply the same logic when trying to pull out of a side road in a 30mph limit, just in case someone is zooming along at 60 or 100mph?
Should I not go around country bends just in case a biker is doing 100mph and strays onto my side of the road because he can't hold the line?
Should I stop at the entry of a dual-carriageway, just in case some Ferrari is doing 150+ mph on the inside lane? (My wife once nearly got rear-ended by a Ferrari doing estimated 180mph on the inside lane when she was joining a dual-carriageway)
My view is that the overtake was safe (and it was completed at legal speed within a reasonable timeframe without impairing any other road user, and with plenty of time to spare before meeting oncoming traffic).
You disagree and think it wasn't safe.
That alone shows that submissions to police would be very variable due to different people's interpretations of what's safe and what's legal.