The future of Advanced Driving.
Discussion
SK425 said:
Why do you say that? I would expect them to continue to use the techniques they perceive to be of value. I don't think it's necessarily the case that an IAM test pass is evidence that that driver perceives value in every aspect of the IAM's driving style. In fact, I'm certain that isn't always the case.
Absolutely. It's very clear that this is certainly the case with a great many. Not criticising this attitude, people use the parts they feel are useful and bin the parts they don't consider useful, the obvious ones being PP and separation. Just out of curiosity are there any other bits you personally would leave out or consider unnecessary, or just those two aspects?I personally drive as if every journey was an AD test, boring I know, perhaps I feel as though I'm not expert enough to add my own ideas, I'm not sure that my ideas would be any improvement, I'm completely honest about this so don't slate me to death!
Best wishes SK.
mph1977 said:
odd isn't it that many organisations and regulatory bodies insist on periodic revlaidation / rec ertification for people tobe able to retain a qualification / membership of an organisation / licence to practice ... we've even now reached the point with driver CPC where it's come to the government driving licence ( regardless of ho potentially ineffective Driver CPC is and how ineffective previous medical requirements to renew licence at 45 and subsequently)
Sorry mph, I'm a bit lost with this one.Best wishes.
So the thread has finally reached the point where I want to be at.
I said I wouldn't be arguing and being pedantic about the system and bgol and stuff, I meant it.
So I understand that two areas of the system in particular are considered pretty useless once the test is passed, these being bgol avoidance and pull-push steering.
Driving is very much a personal thing and the techniques used vary considerably, in the past I may have come across as thinking that anything but a perfect display of PP and full separation was un-advanced, this is not the case, some of the best drives I've ever been a passenger in have been anything but to IAM/RoSPA standard but have still been, to me, very advanced, natural talent does exist in driving, it isn't limited to 'AD people', many of whom I've seen have had little in the way of natural talent.
So the question is, and has now been asked: What areas aside from PP and separation are considered to be less than necessary in your drives as individuals?
Many thanks to all contributors to this thread, best wishes all! SM.
I said I wouldn't be arguing and being pedantic about the system and bgol and stuff, I meant it.
So I understand that two areas of the system in particular are considered pretty useless once the test is passed, these being bgol avoidance and pull-push steering.
Driving is very much a personal thing and the techniques used vary considerably, in the past I may have come across as thinking that anything but a perfect display of PP and full separation was un-advanced, this is not the case, some of the best drives I've ever been a passenger in have been anything but to IAM/RoSPA standard but have still been, to me, very advanced, natural talent does exist in driving, it isn't limited to 'AD people', many of whom I've seen have had little in the way of natural talent.
So the question is, and has now been asked: What areas aside from PP and separation are considered to be less than necessary in your drives as individuals?
Many thanks to all contributors to this thread, best wishes all! SM.
Tartan Pixie said:
Personally I can't wait for the the first EEG controlled electric car, it'll be proper smiles per miles and arguments over BGOL will be as relevant as horse riders arguing over the difference between having a snaffle or pellum bit on their bridle.
The military already have un-manned ATVs...I personally prefer the Egbert snaffle...
Good post that was, I read it again and it was good, personally I'd rather stay with 1950s technology, I feel as though the latest driver aids are a 'dumbing down' move, parking sensors/ABS/airbags etc I believe are no substitute for driver skill.
'Tomorrows world' in the 70s predicted we would be travelling by stepping on to conveyor belts by the year 2000, it hasn't happened but the driverless car, or perhaps it will be an Omnibus or Tram type thing is just around the corner imo, wonder what the government will do for money then? No car tax, no speeding fines etc, they'll have to think of other stealth taxes then eh?
Mind you, currently they spend some of all those billions gained from Road tax, not on road maintenance and stuff, it's all spent on cameras to nick you and speed bumps to slow you down/wreck your car, the rest of it god knows what they spend it on. Where I live you can't drive 50 yards without a speed bump, one in particular is like driving up a curb, even in a 4x4 it seems very excessive and it's only 10 yards from a t-junction, surely a Stop sign would have been money better spent. The mind boggles, mind you it's a well known fact that our roads department is staffed by non-drivers, not a joke that is a fact!
Best wishes. Thanks for your input.
vonhosen said:
<More candidate driven>
How does that work with a candidate that perhaps, doesn't know that much? I can understand that in Police training circles with candidates that are already pretty knowledgeable and perhaps already have some good techniques down, but what about in ordinary civilian further training, where perhaps little is known about good technique?waremark said:
What aspects would you consider to be necessary?
Forward obs, sign-awareness, safe distances, the general attitude to safety etc, vehicle sympathy, smoothness (does this really matter much, we're not always driving Grandma or the Queen)...I'd perhaps drop rev-matching, separation, PP and commentary...Although I am a big fan of these things myself, those are the things perhaps less necessary imo, to be fair to me I wouldn't change anything, but then I'm not the knowledgeable one here with the ideas for change.
So yeah, I'd probably drop the 'flair' aspects only, but then would I be sacrificing the 'sparkle'?
I really don't know, that's why I'm asking I guess.
mph1977 said:
What a good post shame it's negated by reference to 'road tax' thus removing any credibility you had.
Oh sorry about that.What is the issue? I said 'Road-Tax' instead of Road fund duty? Or my view generally on the subject? Perhaps the government DO spend that money on filling pot-holes etc, and they spend other money on speed cams and humps?
I can't have lost much credibility, I had very little to begin with!
Best wishes.
vonhosen said:
1) You over estimate Police circles.
2) You provide a safe supportive learning environment. Together you work on what's important 'for them' to improve on (where they come into conflict with others or struggle with things). You don't give answers, you ask questions that encourage them to search for the options & answers to overcome their problems. They are their problems, their options, their solutions, their success or failure. They practice & you help them make sense of that experience through their thoughts/feelings. They own it all. They are learning to be responsible for it all & they learn to work through their own problems, rather than 'we never covered that scenario at school'.
I know Von, what you are saying, but like I've said before to me that looks like suggesting stuff and then convincing the candidate that it was their own idea. Again if they come up with little in the way of options and answers what are you going to do? Just leave it at that? Or suggest things? 2) You provide a safe supportive learning environment. Together you work on what's important 'for them' to improve on (where they come into conflict with others or struggle with things). You don't give answers, you ask questions that encourage them to search for the options & answers to overcome their problems. They are their problems, their options, their solutions, their success or failure. They practice & you help them make sense of that experience through their thoughts/feelings. They own it all. They are learning to be responsible for it all & they learn to work through their own problems, rather than 'we never covered that scenario at school'.
To me, in my plebeian way, coaching is just another word for instruction, a more 'softly-softly' approach maybe, but still very similar imo.
Not for the first time have you said I overestimate the bobbies, I accept that there may be little in the way of natural talent, but after coming through all this 'coaching' surely they should be up to scratch. A lot of people consider our Police driver training as the best in the world, clearly not in your eyes, I can't argue though, not having experienced any Police training myself.
Instruction: 'You must do this...'
Coaching: 'What if we considered doing this...'
I'm not arguing btw, I know your views and respect them, just wonder what you do with a candidate that isn't forthcoming with their own suggestions, or the suggestions given are not very sound? What if the candidate suggested something you consider unsound, and argued the point that they haven't crashed using it? Would you allow this and then fail them? Or instruct/coach them in a better technique? To me I see very little difference in the two concepts, plebian I know, no pressure to respond.
mph1977 said:
vehicle excise duty has not been hypotheticated since the 1930s.
Is that all it was? VED then, so do you agree with, or take issue with my view on VED and the way that money is spent?I see, VED money isn't hypothecated since the 30s meaning it hasn't been used to pay for road services since the 30s. Yes that was what I was saying.
vonhosen said:
They are going to be driving on their own, having to make decisions on their own & be responsible for those decisions/outcomes. They may as well start learning to do that now, because you won't be there to tell them what to do in the future.
There are a lot of techniques to draw from others through questioning & the problem with instruction is that it tends not to recognise what knowledge people already do have. Instruction tells what the instructor thinks instead of asking what the candidate thinks. All those candidates will have spent at least a decade watching a variety of other people drive before they even started driving themselves. They'll have seen a variety of ways & a variety of outcomes, but don't limit them to them. Be creative & there is knowledge in their subconscious that they aren't aware of, but it can be drawn from them. Instruction & coaching are completely different philosophies. You don't ask questions in coaching to get an answer you are looking for, you ask them to find out what the candidate thinks/feels & aid the candidate gain insight.
I can't respond to that, it still looks exactly as I put it in my post, instruction via nurturing, the outcome still has to be that the candidate does/says/demonstrates what the coach needs to see/hear. It just looks to me like a more PC way of saying instructing, or as you put it 'aiding the candidate to gain insight'. I can't get away from this view. There are a lot of techniques to draw from others through questioning & the problem with instruction is that it tends not to recognise what knowledge people already do have. Instruction tells what the instructor thinks instead of asking what the candidate thinks. All those candidates will have spent at least a decade watching a variety of other people drive before they even started driving themselves. They'll have seen a variety of ways & a variety of outcomes, but don't limit them to them. Be creative & there is knowledge in their subconscious that they aren't aware of, but it can be drawn from them. Instruction & coaching are completely different philosophies. You don't ask questions in coaching to get an answer you are looking for, you ask them to find out what the candidate thinks/feels & aid the candidate gain insight.
The coaching side of it seems fine and I have no issue with it whatsoever but it's just semantics to me, a different approach to the same thing. The candidate still has to arrive at the same point, where the coach is happy with what is being demonstrated.
If anything, in my case, I prefer the concept of coaching, this as I said before is the reason I gave up on observing, I would have preferred an approach similar to your own. I still consider coaching as a softly-softly method of instruction. Either way you are still going to be altering anything which iyo is unsound. Again when a candidate comes up with an idea/technique which is sound great, but when it isn't sound the coach is going to have to change that one way or another. It's still a teacher/pupil relationship.
I'm still more interested in the techniques you are going to coach, rather than the semantics of the wording used to describe the method of teaching.
vonhosen said:
If you think they are going down the wrong path you let them (safely) go there. They'll either find it doesn't work & come back to try another or it'll work for them & you would have been wrong.
How does that sit with a driving test examiner?IME a lot of people drive in a way that an AD will consider unsound, their defensive argument is often the fact that they haven't crashed yet using their method, which if I'm correct is considered by most as a moot point, surely to examine a drive in a test situation it needs a certain amount of standardisation and is assessed against a criteria...
Anyway no point me posting on this, I'm not a teacher or driving instructor, whatever method of training you prefer is fine with me, I'm more interested to know what you would consider unsound or unacceptable that's all, I have no grounds or need to take issue with anything you've said. I'd be happy to be trained in that way, as long as the end result is acceptable I care not what method is used. I'd like you to post something about actual driving rather than the method of instruction. Not taking issue on your methods, just the wording I struggle with.
Best wishes.
Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Sunday 2nd February 23:29
vonhosen said:
In instruction you are telling them how they are to do it (the technique), in coaching you aren't. In instruction you are steering them towards 'the way', in coaching you aren't. In coaching your questions are to help them find a way that works for them.
First they'll identify their problem, they'll then be encouraged to talk about what happens & why it's a problem. They'll talk about what they'd like it to be like instead. You'll ask them about what they think/feel when they are having difficulties, who doesn't suffer from their problem & what they do differently etc. Through a variety of techniques you'll draw up a list of options to try & they'll choose which they'd like to try first. As I say there is no directing them towards 'a way' there, it's learning to work through things yourself & take responsibility for the process.
Yes I have a grip of the concept and have no issue with it. I edited that previous post while you were posting this.First they'll identify their problem, they'll then be encouraged to talk about what happens & why it's a problem. They'll talk about what they'd like it to be like instead. You'll ask them about what they think/feel when they are having difficulties, who doesn't suffer from their problem & what they do differently etc. Through a variety of techniques you'll draw up a list of options to try & they'll choose which they'd like to try first. As I say there is no directing them towards 'a way' there, it's learning to work through things yourself & take responsibility for the process.
The only issue I see with this is that it's going to take more time, I'm fine with it, I look at it the same way as Music lessons or Driving lessons, when being paid for this service are you going to be quick to reach the end or slow? Which makes better business sense? My eldest son had an ADI that adopted this approach, cost him hundreds and still couldn't drive, he then changed to a domineering ex-army ADI who had him test ready very quickly, didn't work for him, he needed instructing firmly.
vonhosen said:
Funnily enough the army did an experiment with their driver training. They trained some of their students using coaching & some with traditional instruction & looked at the results. Those coached were ready for test quicker & had a higher pass rate. With regard to your son you are looking at it in a single example (you may for instance have just had a poor coach), the wider the sample, the better.
Agreed, in that instance that particular ADI is well known for taking a very long time to get learners test ready, in fact she has ceased trading, it wasn't just my son, most of her learners had the same problem, not only that but she used to take two fag breaks during a lesson and always arrived back well before the hour was over, she was just a crap ADI. The other guy he was a quite formidable ex RSM type who got the job done very quickly. Interesting what you say about MoD training, I wonder though if a squaddy or a bobby is going to be better equipped than a civvy though with regard to responding to the coaching. I wasn't suggesting that my small sample size was anything to use as an argument against your method, that ADI was flawed in many ways.Does MoD driver training differ much from the bobbies, or is it along pretty similar lines, obviously apart from B&T training and exemptions? How much similarity is there between them and IAM training? In terms of techniques I mean?
I often wonder when in these forums how much there can be to this driving malarkey, after all it's something that millions of people do to one standard or another on a daily basis and I have struggled to understand what it is we find to discuss at these lengths. As in all walks of life I feel as though I don't know enough, yet I find very little insight when I read our threads, even this one has come up with very little in the way of alternative approaches to the actual drive as yet.
vonhosen said:
The army training in question was for DSA tests, not emergency response etc.
Oh I see.Perhaps you are wondering, as may others, what happened to my 'know it all' attitude in these forums, so I'll explain.
I lost the attitude because I am suffering from a growing dissatisfaction with my own driving and knowledge of driving. I spend a lot of time reading these forums and very little time posting because the more I read, the more questions I can't answer, both about technique and laws. I feel as though I'm missing out on a lot of knowledge hence the never-ending questions.
At one time I considered myself as 'Advanced', this situation has changed, when I can't answer questions such as Waremarks' 'what do I consider unnecessary' and get completely lost in most threads to the point where I daren't post at all, I get to more and more thinking that I know very little, also when I see that things such as the system are considered old-hat and I'm not savvy with the current thinking that too adds doubt in my mind.
Hence this thread and my ceaseless probing for answers, it's even started to irritate me.
I am trying to get as much insight as possible, and do understand that this may be a cause of irritation...
I feel as though I'm not developing any longer, a problem for me in every aspect of my life not just driving, this has always been a problem and a frustration.
Best wishes VH, sorry if I come over as argumentative, it is frustration on my part.
Hi all, many thanks for the contributions to this thread so far! I'm delighted with the way it's evolving. It was my wish to begin a new thread where some discussion on new stuff takes place rather than the same old same old, and hopefully try to make amends somewhat to some of the people who I may have come across to as being a bit of a dick in the past, and learn a lot from some talented drivers. I'm delighted with the input received thus far.
It hadn't occurred to me at the start of the thread that a lot of the forward thinking on the subject of AD would be along the lines of teaching methods and while I have nothing to offer in that area it is very interesting nonetheless and as this is an important area in the future of AD I'm very happy to have it discussed here at length.
Please don't anyone worry about flooding the thread with this very necessary input, I appreciate it and judging by the responses it is an area which many people want to discuss and it makes for interesting reading, which is what I wanted from the off.
So thanks very much folks and feel free to keep posting, nothing within the AD realm is OT as far as I'm concerned and I'm happy to see the thread grow and grow, having such esteemed company contributing to my thread has made me feel much better about my position in AD, if I've come up with an idea for a thread which is clearly of value, then I feel more confident with myself as a result.
Hope that last paragraph makes sense.
Best wishes all and many thanks once again!
It hadn't occurred to me at the start of the thread that a lot of the forward thinking on the subject of AD would be along the lines of teaching methods and while I have nothing to offer in that area it is very interesting nonetheless and as this is an important area in the future of AD I'm very happy to have it discussed here at length.
Please don't anyone worry about flooding the thread with this very necessary input, I appreciate it and judging by the responses it is an area which many people want to discuss and it makes for interesting reading, which is what I wanted from the off.
So thanks very much folks and feel free to keep posting, nothing within the AD realm is OT as far as I'm concerned and I'm happy to see the thread grow and grow, having such esteemed company contributing to my thread has made me feel much better about my position in AD, if I've come up with an idea for a thread which is clearly of value, then I feel more confident with myself as a result.
Hope that last paragraph makes sense.
Best wishes all and many thanks once again!
The idea (well fact actually) that the vast majority of drivers have no wish whatsoever to further develop their own driving is the nub of all this. It's fine coming up with good ideas regarding driver training but the training has to be taken up by the drivers otherwise the best teaching techniques available will not achieve very much.
With us here, we have all taken a pride and interest in this activity, myself I had an ADI who was ex-police who turned me on to the concept of AD, he gave me an old copy of Roadcraft and John Miles' book 'Expert driving the Police way' and these two books influenced my driving a great deal, I worked in the trade and drove Bangers and Stock Cars and was very interested in driving as an activity, like all of us who have taken AD training the desire to be a good driver was high on my list of priorities, being mad on cars in those days the whole gammut was one of my main interests. I wasn't interested in safety in those days, I was motivated by the wish to go quickly and wanted to know how to get the best out of a vehicle by having good control and cornering ability, from John Miles' book I learned about reading the road conditions (surfaces etc), I wanted to push the car and having the knowledge of mechanics that I was developing at the time the gear-changing techniques, braking techniques, steering etc were the things I was very interested in. Once I'd binned the L-plates I continued to have a lesson once a week, I enjoyed the company of my instructor Tony and he recommended we do some mway driving post test so we did that and as I have a questioning personality I would ask about advanced techniques and learned a hell of a lot very quickly in my driving career, I had no interest in taking the RoSPA test as I didn't like the idea of the Police involvement much at that time. Later I went into Engine assembly at RR and found it very boring compared to my apprenticeship in a back-street garage where I had the opportunity to drive customers cars, all different ones, on a regular basis. I came to meet a guy through local car auctions who was in Road-Test, he said that it was a good crack but you had to do your advanced test to get in, knowing what I already did from Tony and the books I decided to have a go and did ok and subsequently changed job. Again this move was motivated not by safety but a desire to get in some class motors and have some fun and relieve the boredom I was suffering from.
Now it's a fact I'm sure we'll all agree that an interest in being safe isn't really a priority for a youth, the safety side of RoSPA was really nothing I had any interest in, and this is the rub. I'm sure we all agree that the responsibility and safety side starts to develop after becoming a parent. So at 21 I started carrying my family in the car and this lead to a very different approach to my drive. However when not carrying them I still drove, err, how can I put it, not exactly with safety as a priority, ahem, until my children were old enough to actually be out playing and crossing roads etc, only then did the idea of driving safely become ingrained, the subconscious thought of mowing down someone's kid, or my own getting mown down began to become part of my thought on driving, the responsibility that, in the majority of cases I feel comes with maturity.
Anyway I left the motor trade as a career and did 5 years full-time uni, although I still kept my hand in at a couple of back-street garages, needs must and all that, had zero finances at the time. Years later I decided to do the IAM to just see if I was as good as I thought I was and again did ok. When on-road I am happy with my driving, I'm sure I'm not the best and speed is never a priority or an interest anymore, I feel safe and take responsibility and pride, I'm more about steering and gear-changing these days than pushing vehicles in bends or going quickly, plus I relocated to Cornwall where life has a much, much slower pace and driving is much more laid back.
So the point is I was interested, driving was never a means to an end, cars and driving were an interest rather than just a means of getting to work and the shops etc. Once behind the wheel I wanted to be part of the machine and have mastery of the controls and conditions. This situation I'm sure we here can all identify with, we've all spent money taking further training becuase of broadly similar reasons to the ones I've outlined. We've seen and admired good driving, we probably all like F1, Bangers, Stocks, 4x4, Rallying etc. This doesn't apply to everyone who drives however. A great many see driving as a chore, the drive to work say, probably tired and grouchy, maybe a little late, mind is on other stuff, the row with the wife last night or the kids playing up. Imagine the mild-mannered family man, never breaks the law or would even dream of doing, responsible and caring in every way, yet turns into a monster immediately on getting in the car, rage, aggression, everyone else is an idiot, he or she may even come close to eliminating someone or committing suicide on a daily basis, what other circumstances may a perfectly normal, law-abiding citizen beome an habitual law-breaker and close on a killer, regularly? Not many I imagine.
The type of person outlined in the preceeding paragraph is never going to spend any cash or have any desire to do any further training, they aren't like us here, interested in improving. Furthermore, where we are constantly developing and striving to be the best we can for the reasons outlined above and know what good driving is and where we may fall short of our own targets and would like to get better, the person in the previous paragraph believes themselves, in a great many cases, to be an absolute demon behind the wheel and probably believes they are well above the standard of someone who is prepared to take on some further training. 'Who d'you think you are Sterling Moss?' It isn't a joke, they really do think they're that good, when they fall off the road or hit someone or something, it's usually the roads' fault or the other drivers' or when they get done by the fuzz it's always the fuzz or the government that is at fault. It's like speeding gatsos and Police patrols, if you're not seeing them before they get you how likely are you to see that kid that's about to run in front of you or that person on auto pilot who's just realised they are going to have to brake, heavily?
These types of person you are never going to get, period. It matters little what new teaching methods are out there or new ideas in terms of technique, they aren't volunteering, and you have to pay for training. When I have mentioned AD to acquaintances (I don't do that anymore) the response is invariably 'what do you want to do that for?' In their own minds they probably believe they are well better driver than I and everybody else on the roads, these attitudes aren't limited to 17 year olds, some of the most irresponsible drivers I've ever seen are middle aged Mums and Dads, ime at least most young drivers have some level of interest in driving whereas their parents couldn't care less and that attitude rubs off as well.
Imo there is only one answer, further training has to be compulsory period. Now I'm touching on party politics, my pet hate, we all know no party is going to commit political suicide by implementing compulsory driver further training. To me every driver should be driving to at least IAM/RoSPA standard, but like I say no party is going to introduce this as it would be instant death to whoever did, imo, and I don't want to start on my political beliefs, one of the reasons why party politics is an absolute sham, christ they'd be compared to the Nazis if they dared even suggest it.
It has to be made compulsory right across the board in my opinion, forget making it 'cool' or desirable by seducing them with candy, this has been tried by someone when they gave those Bristol kids carting sessions if they went with IAM observers, they wouldn't have done it otherwise.
If you had to retake your test perhaps every five years and your license depended on it, oh and forget advanced, even if it was just to DSA standard it would be an improvement, millions would fail. Perhaps if then it was marked against a criteria, say level 1, 2 etc, and your score was directly related to your insurance premium and the size of car you were allowed to drive it might improve the situation. Nothing is going to make people take training on a voluntary basis apart from the things outlined in my case which I'm sure includes many of us here.
Best wishes and apologies for this long-winded epistle!
With us here, we have all taken a pride and interest in this activity, myself I had an ADI who was ex-police who turned me on to the concept of AD, he gave me an old copy of Roadcraft and John Miles' book 'Expert driving the Police way' and these two books influenced my driving a great deal, I worked in the trade and drove Bangers and Stock Cars and was very interested in driving as an activity, like all of us who have taken AD training the desire to be a good driver was high on my list of priorities, being mad on cars in those days the whole gammut was one of my main interests. I wasn't interested in safety in those days, I was motivated by the wish to go quickly and wanted to know how to get the best out of a vehicle by having good control and cornering ability, from John Miles' book I learned about reading the road conditions (surfaces etc), I wanted to push the car and having the knowledge of mechanics that I was developing at the time the gear-changing techniques, braking techniques, steering etc were the things I was very interested in. Once I'd binned the L-plates I continued to have a lesson once a week, I enjoyed the company of my instructor Tony and he recommended we do some mway driving post test so we did that and as I have a questioning personality I would ask about advanced techniques and learned a hell of a lot very quickly in my driving career, I had no interest in taking the RoSPA test as I didn't like the idea of the Police involvement much at that time. Later I went into Engine assembly at RR and found it very boring compared to my apprenticeship in a back-street garage where I had the opportunity to drive customers cars, all different ones, on a regular basis. I came to meet a guy through local car auctions who was in Road-Test, he said that it was a good crack but you had to do your advanced test to get in, knowing what I already did from Tony and the books I decided to have a go and did ok and subsequently changed job. Again this move was motivated not by safety but a desire to get in some class motors and have some fun and relieve the boredom I was suffering from.
Now it's a fact I'm sure we'll all agree that an interest in being safe isn't really a priority for a youth, the safety side of RoSPA was really nothing I had any interest in, and this is the rub. I'm sure we all agree that the responsibility and safety side starts to develop after becoming a parent. So at 21 I started carrying my family in the car and this lead to a very different approach to my drive. However when not carrying them I still drove, err, how can I put it, not exactly with safety as a priority, ahem, until my children were old enough to actually be out playing and crossing roads etc, only then did the idea of driving safely become ingrained, the subconscious thought of mowing down someone's kid, or my own getting mown down began to become part of my thought on driving, the responsibility that, in the majority of cases I feel comes with maturity.
Anyway I left the motor trade as a career and did 5 years full-time uni, although I still kept my hand in at a couple of back-street garages, needs must and all that, had zero finances at the time. Years later I decided to do the IAM to just see if I was as good as I thought I was and again did ok. When on-road I am happy with my driving, I'm sure I'm not the best and speed is never a priority or an interest anymore, I feel safe and take responsibility and pride, I'm more about steering and gear-changing these days than pushing vehicles in bends or going quickly, plus I relocated to Cornwall where life has a much, much slower pace and driving is much more laid back.
So the point is I was interested, driving was never a means to an end, cars and driving were an interest rather than just a means of getting to work and the shops etc. Once behind the wheel I wanted to be part of the machine and have mastery of the controls and conditions. This situation I'm sure we here can all identify with, we've all spent money taking further training becuase of broadly similar reasons to the ones I've outlined. We've seen and admired good driving, we probably all like F1, Bangers, Stocks, 4x4, Rallying etc. This doesn't apply to everyone who drives however. A great many see driving as a chore, the drive to work say, probably tired and grouchy, maybe a little late, mind is on other stuff, the row with the wife last night or the kids playing up. Imagine the mild-mannered family man, never breaks the law or would even dream of doing, responsible and caring in every way, yet turns into a monster immediately on getting in the car, rage, aggression, everyone else is an idiot, he or she may even come close to eliminating someone or committing suicide on a daily basis, what other circumstances may a perfectly normal, law-abiding citizen beome an habitual law-breaker and close on a killer, regularly? Not many I imagine.
The type of person outlined in the preceeding paragraph is never going to spend any cash or have any desire to do any further training, they aren't like us here, interested in improving. Furthermore, where we are constantly developing and striving to be the best we can for the reasons outlined above and know what good driving is and where we may fall short of our own targets and would like to get better, the person in the previous paragraph believes themselves, in a great many cases, to be an absolute demon behind the wheel and probably believes they are well above the standard of someone who is prepared to take on some further training. 'Who d'you think you are Sterling Moss?' It isn't a joke, they really do think they're that good, when they fall off the road or hit someone or something, it's usually the roads' fault or the other drivers' or when they get done by the fuzz it's always the fuzz or the government that is at fault. It's like speeding gatsos and Police patrols, if you're not seeing them before they get you how likely are you to see that kid that's about to run in front of you or that person on auto pilot who's just realised they are going to have to brake, heavily?
These types of person you are never going to get, period. It matters little what new teaching methods are out there or new ideas in terms of technique, they aren't volunteering, and you have to pay for training. When I have mentioned AD to acquaintances (I don't do that anymore) the response is invariably 'what do you want to do that for?' In their own minds they probably believe they are well better driver than I and everybody else on the roads, these attitudes aren't limited to 17 year olds, some of the most irresponsible drivers I've ever seen are middle aged Mums and Dads, ime at least most young drivers have some level of interest in driving whereas their parents couldn't care less and that attitude rubs off as well.
Imo there is only one answer, further training has to be compulsory period. Now I'm touching on party politics, my pet hate, we all know no party is going to commit political suicide by implementing compulsory driver further training. To me every driver should be driving to at least IAM/RoSPA standard, but like I say no party is going to introduce this as it would be instant death to whoever did, imo, and I don't want to start on my political beliefs, one of the reasons why party politics is an absolute sham, christ they'd be compared to the Nazis if they dared even suggest it.
It has to be made compulsory right across the board in my opinion, forget making it 'cool' or desirable by seducing them with candy, this has been tried by someone when they gave those Bristol kids carting sessions if they went with IAM observers, they wouldn't have done it otherwise.
If you had to retake your test perhaps every five years and your license depended on it, oh and forget advanced, even if it was just to DSA standard it would be an improvement, millions would fail. Perhaps if then it was marked against a criteria, say level 1, 2 etc, and your score was directly related to your insurance premium and the size of car you were allowed to drive it might improve the situation. Nothing is going to make people take training on a voluntary basis apart from the things outlined in my case which I'm sure includes many of us here.
Best wishes and apologies for this long-winded epistle!
Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Thursday 6th February 06:51
vonhosen said:
That's why you start with learners & use a method that promotes critical reflection & empowers them to self coach.
Sounds great in theory Von but do you really think they will be interested? What is going to motivate them to improve post-test?Critical reflection and self-coaching, that is self-coaching in the good/safe aspects of driving doesn't sound like the majority of drivers to me, also from what I've seen most just laugh about near misses and mistakes, even convictions and accidents, imo critical reflection as regards most drivers is a romantic notion existing mostly in the imagination of those who would like it to happen.
While I agree 100% with the ideas and methods of training you are advocating, I can't see where the interest in this is going to come from, apart from in those like us who are already 'converted'.
I reckon, just like the DSA training currently, it's mostly going to go in the bin along with the L-plates once the initial test is passed, or in the case of AD training perhaps not, although a lot reckon all that goes in the bin too once the badge has been acquired.
As you know I feel as though these things shouldn't be reliant on the interest of the candidate but should be compulsory, as in regular retesting.
I also think that already new drivers self-coach, just more likely to be self-coaching over some technique they heard about in max power rather than anything safety or responsibility related.
To summarise I think the GDE stuff you have outlined is all good stuff, I just don't know where the interest/motivation to improve (improve as we see it) is going to come from post-test, unless we're talking about drivers who would consider AD training, (a completely different mindset imo) which I don't think you are. There's no point me repeating what I wrote in that long post but I think most drivers just want a license and have no interest in further development whatever the training method used initially.
I agree they will self-coach, but I think that'll be more along the lines of something they've done on Gran Turismo for PS4 or seen on Rallying programmes, Ken Block etc, than anything else.
johnao said:
Come on Winston, don't take it so seriously! There's always a place for ironic humour, even on PistonHeads.
PS: 25NAD90TUL, if it wasn't ironic humour you should be tied to the back of a bicycle and dragged through the streets of London, through red traffic lights, along pavements, up and down kerbs, dodge and weave through slow moving traffic, that'll teach you to respect your betters! Maybe you might even buy yourself a bicycle.
I won't respond to Rob's post but will to yours johnao.PS: 25NAD90TUL, if it wasn't ironic humour you should be tied to the back of a bicycle and dragged through the streets of London, through red traffic lights, along pavements, up and down kerbs, dodge and weave through slow moving traffic, that'll teach you to respect your betters! Maybe you might even buy yourself a bicycle.
It was a rhetorical post that worked both to illustrate the pathetic attitude exhibited to cyclists by drivers, and the gullibility of cyclists in responding to deliberately provocative posts. The clever ones spotted it quickly but the not so clever ones walked into it eyes wide shut.
It worked in deadly fashion on both levels, as exhibited in the thread.
It was outted immediately as a comedy post by irocfan, but still a lot didn't get the idea and showed themselves up as a result. Especially when an unfortunate individual with Cerebral Palsy was brought into it, I fancied a laugh with it but decided to keep out of it after that, the bottom of the barrel was well and truly scraped.
I've been a cyclist since 1973.
WinstonWolf said:
Your attitude towards cyclists marks you down as a dangerous driver, prejudice has no place in advanced driving.
http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Not the sharpest tool in the box are we?http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...
See my post in response to johnao.
Btw Rob, my rhetorical post mentioned nothing whatsoever about my driving, it was completely unrelated to driving.
Given the statement you made in that thread regarding seven seconds, I wonder (with your great capacity for thought) if you'd considered what my gap might be regarding cyclists? Clearly adding two and two together isn't a strongpoint, despite your penchant for maths.
As I clearly need to spell it out for those with low-IQs, it was a rhetorical post that parodied the attitude I've seen displayed by drivers in those silly threads.
It worked both ways though, some of the cyclists showed their gullibility by not getting the irony, I mean how gullible are they? The thread is entitled 'Idiot Cyclists' ffs.
I've been cycling since 1973.
A word to the (un)wise, when you come across someone in life who says things that make you think 'is this person either very clever or very stupid?'...always err toward the former, it usually saves a lot of embarrassment. A clever adversary might have assumed I'd read that thread entirely and had seen you in there and saw an opportunity to bait you personally, It worked within less than an hour of my posting.
Now run a long boy, this thread isn't for you.
Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Saturday 8th February 16:29
WinstonWolf said:
Far sharper than you...
If it was so funny how come no one bar you noticed?
Clearly a legend in your own mind...See my earlier 'very smart or very stupid' comment.If it was so funny how come no one bar you noticed?
Actually irocfan outted it pretty quickly, johnao...the hundreds who doubtless read it and didn't bother responding...
Anway much as I enjoy your 50 odd thousands posts, all useless, run along now, this thread is for adults.
PS: If you want to discontinue being Pawned in this fashion you might wanna abstain from responding to my posts in future.
Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Saturday 8th February 15:23
WinstonWolf said:
Remind us again which forums you got chucked off 
I'll post where the f
k I like Mr Seven Seconds...
Yes do continue.I'll post where the f
k I like Mr Seven Seconds...I have never been 'chucked off' a forum, don't know where you got that from, I requested to be removed from ADUK and I let my membership expire from IAM so I don't know what tree your barking up there. Btw everybody knows this.
Best wishes Rob, and do keep in touch, I can almost feel the heat from your purple face as those veins throb wildly, watch your blood pressure buddy!
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff