Starting with IAM

Author
Discussion

waterwonder

Original Poster:

995 posts

175 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
25NAD90TUL said:
There seems to be a big fear of being 'forced' into these things, nothing was compulsory IIRC, it isn't compulsory to pass. On the force thing, I think some observers might struggle to force a fart out, never mind anything elsewink

Personally I think further training should be compulsory in some form, but that is another matter.

In a way I see the point though, a 'you must do it this way or fail' when it comes to a minor point is misleading. However with something as subjective as AD the candidate is always going to be subjected to the observers' pet techniques and ideas. From what I recall the observers' ideas may differ dramatically from the examiners'.
I think some of this feeds my slightly wider point about the relevance and appeal of IAM to the younger generation of drivers (say <35). Whether you (we) like it or not the common perception is that its a waste of time and that a lot of it is concerned with old fashioned ideals and systems. It struck me as odd that Mike made the observation about the next generation shortly after spending 20 minutes telling me about positions and cock pit drills etc.


SVS

3,824 posts

270 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
I agree with Waterwonder's wider point. Also, this is about priorities: I'd argue that it should be a far higher priority for an Observer to start by focusing on the important stuff, such as observation and anticipation, not wasting 20 minutes (!) on a cockpit drill.

The IAM has a huge amount of valuable stuff to offer many drivers, such as heightened observation and a systematic approach to hazards. That's where an Observer's priorities should be. Otherwise, people will throw out the baby with the bath water.

25NAD90TUL

666 posts

130 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
waterwonder said:
I think some of this feeds my slightly wider point about the relevance and appeal of IAM to the younger generation of drivers (say <35). Whether you (we) like it or not the common perception is that its a waste of time and that a lot of it is concerned with old fashioned ideals and systems. It struck me as odd that Mike made the observation about the next generation shortly after spending 20 minutes telling me about positions and cock pit drills etc.
I know what you are saying. It is a bit that way, or can be perceived as so.

However from the viewpoint of someone who has done it and has no axe to grind, it IS worthwhile if only for the increased anticipation, observation and the sense of responsibility it breeds.

Different people have different perceptions of being taught, some go along with it, even get pleasure out of it, some will resent being instructed completely, ask any school teacher.

IIRC you have a good reason for doing it and passing. A company sporty model wasn't it?

Get it done, listen to what they say, do the test 'their way' get the better car deal, then bin off the bits you consider fussy and a bit pointless, just keep the bits that are of use, you can drive already. It's in your interests to pass it, just do it, whatever is required, after all, once you have, you can make your own mind up and drive however you like.

I personally think driving to the system is a good way to drive, a lot don't and only use the parts they feel applicable to their own drive, that's fine, but all will have passed already, they don't have to comply to anything, but when you want to pass the test you will have to.

It is a true fact that the observers can be much more pedantic over things like steering bgolling etc than what the examiners are, you just have to sort out what is their 'pet' technique and what is the essential stuff, the posters in this thread will help with this, as you've seen.

A huge part of AD is the thought process, and some of the more fussy parts of the system are used to monitor your thought process, commentary is one of them.

Are there specific points being raised that you are struggling to understand?

Whilst I might not be particularly pally with some of the esteemed company likely to contribute to this thread, I can tell you there is a lot of driving talent here already and generally in these circles. Anything you want to know there'll be a lot of talent ready to help you out. Plus if the observer says anything or recommends anything you don't see the point of, you can always ask them why it is important. Main thing is thinking and taking out the things that are going to improve your own drive, it is YOUR drive after all.

Best wishes and keep updating!

25NAD90TUL

666 posts

130 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
SVS said:
I'd argue that it should be a far higher priority for an Observer to start by focusing on the important stuff, such as observation and anticipation, not wasting 20 minutes (!) on a cockpit drill.
Agree in principle, but they won't get very far if the car runs out of petrol or water will they?

Slightly silly I know, but hopefully you see the point!

Eta: Those 20 minutes are probably only going to be 'wasted' on the first drive yes? Hopefully the cockpit drill shouldn't need to be talked about on every observed run are they? After it is learnt it takes a couple of minutes tops.

Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Thursday 11th September 13:54

StressedDave

839 posts

261 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
25NAD90TUL said:
Agreed.

I think there may be a difference between being 'forced' to do it and being taught about it as one option.
Except it's not one option, at least as far as IAM HQ are concerned and, unless the OP gets lucky in getting an Observer with shall we say 'outside interests, by the Observer themselves. Pull-push is mandated by IAM HQ (and probably increasingly so by the examiners whose discretion is being eroded by edicts from on high). While it's all well and good to talk about informed choice and the right to fail, no other choices are being demonstrated or promoted by the 'expert' and in this case, the OP has no choice as I presume passing the test is mandatory else the flashy company car goes bye-byes.

All the improvements in safety with the IAM come from observation and planning rather than from slavish adherence to a series of control techniques. But, and this is a big but, time wasted on foisting these techniques on an uninformed Associates, both in terms of time with the Observer and time spent practicing an unimportant method, could be far better spent on observation and planning.

But pull-push is an easier thing to analyse than observation and planning and when you have effectively an untrained teaching staff it's easy to fall back on the things you had to do when you were an associate. I liken it to being taught GCSE maths by someone with a pass in GCSE maths. It becomes do as I did rather than understanding why you do as you do.

25NAD90TUL

666 posts

130 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
StressedDave said:
Except it's not one option, at least as far as IAM HQ are concerned and, unless the OP gets lucky in getting an Observer with shall we say 'outside interests, by the Observer themselves. Pull-push is mandated by IAM HQ (and probably increasingly so by the examiners whose discretion is being eroded by edicts from on high). While it's all well and good to talk about informed choice and the right to fail, no other choices are being demonstrated or promoted by the 'expert' and in this case, the OP has no choice as I presume passing the test is mandatory else the flashy company car goes bye-byes.

All the improvements in safety with the IAM come from observation and planning rather than from slavish adherence to a series of control techniques. But, and this is a big but, time wasted on foisting these techniques on an uninformed Associates, both in terms of time with the Observer and time spent practicing an unimportant method, could be far better spent on observation and planning.

But pull-push is an easier thing to analyse than observation and planning and when you have effectively an untrained teaching staff it's easy to fall back on the things you had to do when you were an associate. I liken it to being taught GCSE maths by someone with a pass in GCSE maths. It becomes do as I did rather than understanding why you do as you do.
Quite.

I pointed out to the OP that he is free to question the importance of things the observer may insist on.

I do see the point, especially of not demanding change in technique where the technique is currently acceptable, for the sake of change.

I'm not training him...I guess he'll take out of it what he feels is useful, and is probably suffering from some confusion as to how much import is placed on certain matters of technique and 'sparkle'.

SVS

3,824 posts

270 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all

25NAD90TUL said:
Agree in principle, but they won't get very far if the car runs out of petrol or water will they?

Slightly silly I know, but hopefully you see the point!
I do, but feel these are the responsibility of the driver. When I was an IAM Observer, I didn't think any of my Associates needed me to remind them to fill up with petrol. I hope I treated them like the adult, experienced drivers they were.

Certainly, I didn't bother with a cockpit drill. I was more concerned with things like safety, a systematic approach to hazards, smoothness and appropriate speed.

Even when I went on to do the IAM Special Assessment, i.e. what the IAM now calls Masters, I only used a quick phrase like this for the cockpit drill. (I forget the exact wording, but it was brief and chiefly served the purpose highlighted by R_U_LOCAL.)

SVS said:
"I'm happy with the position and function of all the controls. Everything is adjusted to my satisfaction. Having driven here, I'm satisfied that the brakes work as they should."

25NAD90TUL

666 posts

130 months

Thursday 11th September 2014
quotequote all
SVS said:
25NAD90TUL said:
Agree in principle, but they won't get very far if the car runs out of petrol or water will they?

Slightly silly I know, but hopefully you see the point!
I do, but feel these are the responsibility of the driver. When I was an IAM Observer, I didn't think any of my Associates needed me to remind them to fill up with petrol. I hope I treated them like the adult, experienced drivers they were.

Certainly, I didn't bother with a cockpit drill. I was more concerned with things like safety, a systematic approach to hazards, smoothness and appropriate speed.

Even when I went on to do the IAM Special Assessment, i.e. what the IAM now calls Masters, I only used a quick phrase like this for the cockpit drill. (I forget the exact wording, but it was brief and chiefly served the purpose highlighted by R_U_LOCAL.)

SVS said:
"I'm happy with the position and function of all the controls. Everything is adjusted to my satisfaction. Having driven here, I'm satisfied that the brakes work as they should."
Fair enough when someone knows the score but there are a lot of drivers who would benefit from knowing it. I've worked in the trade and have seen cars being used daily coming in with everything you can imagine neglected from the oil to the clutch fluid/brake fluid and everything in between, boiled up with no water etc etc, you get the jist. I think for the sake of ten minutes on the first run it's worth mentioning for the sake of people who perhaps aren't as well-versed in it as you and I.

All I'm saying, my opinion, not arguing or saying it 'must' be, just that at the initial stage when you don't know what kind of driver you're dealing with it might be worth it.

Do you see how it might benefit some of the folks who come to IAM who aren't neccessarily full-on petrolheads?

Fwiw I used to test-drive Rollers and Bentleys, the cockpit drill and pre-drive checklist was a very important thing, and very extensive, your employment future depended on it in fact! (damage limitation)

Your version of the drill sounds fine to me. An examiner can tell pretty quickly if you know anything about the car, I guess I would call it another one of those parts that tell the examiner something about the total stranger whose car he is about to get driven around in.

I suppose again, this is something that I don't see the harm or hassle in doing.



Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Thursday 11th September 23:46

SVS

3,824 posts

270 months

Friday 12th September 2014
quotequote all
Good points - fair enough!

jamesallport

31 posts

222 months

Friday 12th September 2014
quotequote all
Someone I really respect once suggested that the true test of a driver's quality isn't what happens on test day or on the track day they've been looking forward to. It's the day they stagger off a plane in a new time zone, pick up a hire car & have to navigate to an unfamiliar destination in an unfamiliar vehicle.

Lots of us now do that, or something like it. So I do coach my associates to be able to do a full pre drive check in an unfamiliar car. It also has the side benefit of calming nerves for some at the start of a test & if that works then great.

But there's a question of timing. For the first couple of drives with associates, I'm almost always focused pretty completely on observation & planning. That's the biggest value add. And it creates the time in which they can then implement the system.

But every associates different so it's not an iron rule.

25NAD90TUL

666 posts

130 months

Friday 12th September 2014
quotequote all
jamesallport said:
Someone I really respect once suggested that the true test of a driver's quality isn't what happens on test day or on the track day they've been looking forward to. It's the day they stagger off a plane in a new time zone, pick up a hire car & have to navigate to an unfamiliar destination in an unfamiliar vehicle.

Lots of us now do that, or something like it. So I do coach my associates to be able to do a full pre drive check in an unfamiliar car. It also has the side benefit of calming nerves for some at the start of a test & if that works then great.

But there's a question of timing. For the first couple of drives with associates, I'm almost always focused pretty completely on observation & planning. That's the biggest value add. And it creates the time in which they can then implement the system.

But every associates different so it's not an iron rule.
Sounds a good plan this.

Working in the trade is a good one for that, different cars being driven often, often with faults that you don't know about, often the point is to diagnose the faults, pre-drive checks important from an insurance perspective.

Some associates will come and already be on the ball about vehicle checks, while others might not be so, things can be tailored to suit their individual needs, which I fully agree with.

Some observers might be a bit 'systematic' over the 'syllabus' I think the associate may have to accept this, after all some kind of plan is probably neccessary from the observer point of view.

I think a great thing for the IAM to implement would be a 'meet the examiner' session, before any runs take place, my local group do a seminar type classroom session where often, if available, an examiner would be present and give a bit of a briefing, that would be excellent as a number of observers do have different ideas of what is required compared to the actual examiner.


martine

67 posts

210 months

Monday 15th September 2014
quotequote all
Don't you just love the way 90% of this thread is people obsessing...about observers obsessing...about tiny details and how bad/irrelevant/off-putting it is for Advanced Driving?

Can we not focus on the main coaching points from their first drive above? The OP described several key areas like observation/anticipation/commentary etc? These (and others) are the real benefits of taking further driver training Shirley?

Seems to me some people who like to dismiss the IAM and ROSPA, pick up on the tiny details to justify their view and ignore the other 95% of really good stuff.

Edited by martine on Monday 15th September 15:55

Z.B

224 posts

177 months

Monday 15th September 2014
quotequote all
I don't think it's a tiny detail when observers get their priorities wrong, I think it's a serious problem and we should stop blaming the customers and promote better practice.

Can you blame people for mocking when they are told don't put your belt on in case the car explodes? I can hardly keep a straight face myself rolleyes The problem is that is doesn't take many daft comments to destroy ones credibility meaning that the good bits go unheeded.

Those of us within who disagree with this need to stand up and say so clearly.

martine

67 posts

210 months

Tuesday 16th September 2014
quotequote all
Z.B said:
I don't think it's a tiny detail when observers get their priorities wrong, I think it's a serious problem and we should stop blaming the customers and promote better practice.

Can you blame people for mocking when they are told don't put your belt on in case the car explodes? I can hardly keep a straight face myself rolleyes The problem is that is doesn't take many daft comments to destroy ones credibility meaning that the good bits go unheeded.

Those of us within who disagree with this need to stand up and say so clearly.
I agree but what's especially noticeable is the OP mentioned much more important stuff yet it's the tiny details that those who don't like the IAM pick up on. I suspect some who criticise the IAM wouldn't be happy unless what is taught fits exactly to their own view of driving...

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Wednesday 17th September 2014
quotequote all
cockpit drill is important in fleet settings and when you get into an unfamilar type of car ( some car makers are better than others in putting controls in a common place - Vauxhall/ Opel for instance with the exception of the frontera 1 and possibly the RWD Holdens (never been in one ot check) all ther car line for the past couple of decades ( possibly longer certainly the astra 1 / cav 2 / nova shad the standard layout) has shared a common basic control layout ( lights, indicators, wipers + washers, horn ) ... but some people think the GME lightswitch is 'weird / bizarre / ste' ( funny how a similar switch isn;t when it;s attached to a VAG or Mondeo)

waterwonder

Original Poster:

995 posts

175 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
Another day, another drive.

This morning I had my second rive. We started off with a some more pre-flight checks (POWER?), the point was laboured slightly despite me only 'missing' windscreen wipers when asked what i would check before a long journey. Anyway i think we're done with that now.

This time we spent a lot more time driving. I'm starting to get the hang of commentary now and we built up the granularity of it over the course of the session. I'm now bringing in hazards, what's behind, road signage, road positioning as i go. The only bit i do find a bit difficult is knowing when to commentate as we fit in conversation and other instructions along the way.

I did ask about whether it was necessary to commentate during the tests, Mike's opinion is that although not mandatory doing so throughout, will maintain concentration, keep the standard high and demonstrate what one is taking in. (maybe a discussion point for here, on this i'm inclined to agree with Mike i think).

Overall I enjoyed a today's lesson a lot more. We covered a lot, and a lot of the comments about road positioning, composition/position of signage and street furniture were great. I think in general terms I am a competent and diligent driver, however it does make me realise how much of the time i'm on autopilot and how it is possible to read the road a lot more than I am doing.

We did have a minor disagreement about indicating on a roundabout which i'm still unsure about. Having entered a roundabout at 6 o'clock i indicated right until i had passed the exit at 12 o'clock. I then began indicating left to exit at about 2 o'clock. All exits/entrances were two lanes so it is quite a big'un.

Mike's observation was that i begun indicating left too early, and that I should only be indicating left once i'd passed traffic coming onto the roundabout. In other words in this instance indicating left should only be for the traffic coming on at 2 o'clock.

I would agree with this in general but my rationale was that the traffic entering at 12 o'clock were creepers, therefore having past the exit at 12 o'clock i was trying to make it clear that i would be 'cutting' across the creepers path to make my exit. Had i continued to indicate right for longer i think they would have crept more increasing the chance of collision.

Anyway it matters not but it was good to discuss our contrasting points of view. I think we agreed to disagree in the end smile.

Looking forward to the next one, a evening drive.

Edited by waterwonder on Saturday 20th September 19:11

MC Bodge

21,552 posts

174 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
Good to hear that you are finding it useful.

If you read the IAM book thoroughly, nothing sensible should surprise you when you do the drives.

Some of the retrospective justifications for "the one true way" are almost comical, though. If you are an engineer/scientist you might find some of the explanations lacking. Just nod....

As others have said, the Bike IAM is generally more pragmatic.

I would quite like to have another session / refresher with an 'advanced driving' examiner.

The Observation and planning are really useful, but I really cannot be arsed with practising the arbitrary full-separation and no-fixed-input steering techniques again beforehand in preparation.

-Last time I had such a thing those points genuinely were laboured: "race track techniques" apparently... A shame really.

Edited by MC Bodge on Sunday 21st September 10:14

johnao

667 posts

242 months

Saturday 20th September 2014
quotequote all
waterwonder said:
Mike's observation was that i begun indicating left too early, and that I should only be indicating left once i'd passed traffic coming onto the roundabout. In other words in this instance indicating left should only be for the traffic coming on at 2 o'clock.
Next time you meet: ask Mike for his thoughts on... "only indicate if, in your opinion, another road user would benefit"

This simple principle should cover all signalling considerations.

Edited by johnao on Sunday 21st September 08:46

PoshTotty

34 posts

113 months

Saturday 11th October 2014
quotequote all
I quite like the idea of doing the IAM advanced driving test, I'm not a brilliant driver but I think I'm safe and definately don't take risks. I enjoy driving the winding roads locally in my MX5 (yes I know they're hated here) I don't drive anywhere near to the power of the car (does that sound ridiculous?) but enjoy the sensation of cornering even at my relatively slow pace, my boss at the garage has shown me a few pointers on the gearchanging side and I'm getting it pretty smooth I feel, he thinks I might get a lot out of doing the IAM and he says they usually have a few female instructors, observers is it?

Might do it, I think it's a great idea and would be quite proud if I passed the test I reckon.

creampuff

6,511 posts

142 months

Sunday 12th October 2014
quotequote all
25NAD90TUL said:
Don't panic when you learn what the 'B-word' (bgol) and the 'S-word' (separation) are, these are useful techniques that illustrate your planning and anticipation when gear-changing and braking for hazards.
I've passed the RoSPA bike test but WTF is "bgol" and "separation"?