You nailed it. When I posted this, I felt like it was a bit off. I think I was just trying to break it down further, in an effort to explain the experience, but I didn't realize that in doing so I was losing the most relevant mechanism, the awareness of how all things come together, and adjusting oneself to it.
Right. I experience this as well (minus the Ti, I'm not really sure how I develop my 'plan of action' it all just feels like se impulse of moving and adjusting amongst the other vehicles, with some low-level Te in the backdrop, acknowledging times/speed and distance points. I was always the friend that drove the group, when we were in a jam and had to get somewhere very fast. In my early 20's, I was told often that my driving was 'scary'. But no (at my fault) accidents, ever. One of my best ESTJ friends once explained (to me and a few of my other friends) that she was initially scared to drive with me too, but later realize that I was holding on to a constant awareness of where everything was around me (speeds/location/lanes) with a very quick perceptual awareness, that would easily be missed by people driving with me.
Another example, when I did a few waitressing jobs back in the day, was being able to move quickly and smoothly amongst other people, in busy kitchens with hot grills and food flying. It was still a sensory overload for me, but it seemed like I could navigate it with a bit more ease and awareness than quite a few of my co-workers, who were slower and physically awkward, carrying out plates to tables, etc.
So, here is a question for you, or any other se user who might relate...
We take in the real-time data, move what its doing forward with ni and get a future impression. But I will also take in real-time data, with an understanding of how certain components came together (the state that they would have to be, to have come together the exact way they did to create this 'thang' (whatever it might be, let's stick with an object rather than a concept for now) so its the same process, but it moves both forward and backwards. However, it is different from si, because this knowledge of how it came together, isn't based off a previous experience or historical impression. It could be an entirely new object, but your looking at in real-time and just understanding, through multiple variables or function, how it came together. You relate? Anything to say on that?
I don't think Ni or Si is either just past or just future. I think they are both just as much past as they are future. Looking at both Ni doms and Si doms I don't really see a strong correlation between that. Ni is more about concepts/ideas/etc. These concepts/ideas/etc. are just as much from the past as they can be used for the future. Just like Si and saying its about historical or the actual data. It can be just as much used for the past as it is the future. One is more about the dots and the other is more about how the dots connect. If you notice Si uses a lot of stastical anaylsis and categorization to move from what to how. Ni has to go back data to move to the what. Just because you know how something is connected doesn't mean you really know exactly what is connected. With Ni if fed the what it completes the vision, with Si if fed the how it completes the vision. But Ni doesn't naturally see the what and Si does not naturally see the how.
I think us ISxP just go back and forth between our perceptions when we are in a healthier state. Just what I noticed. Se feeds the what and Ni pieces together the how. Was interesting to meet a female ESFP that was feeling out my use of Se, though I don't know if she knows MBTI, but more my use of my sensory ability in the moment. Almost like a challenge per se.