Too many points to be an Advanced Driver

[BOF]

Gromit,

Thanks for your supportive comments, but don't get too excited pal.

The IAM is not a perfect outfit, it IS a charity, we ARE unpaid volunteers...some of us are lucky in being in areas where the Trafpols give us great support - Essex Traffic let use use their Social Club for monthly meetings and support us in other ways.

It is a natural thing these days, unfortunately, that punters who have never had further education in driving, will be attracted to an Advanced Driving website, and make critical comments - no sweat, any discussion on driver education is OK with me.

Must close now - dinner is on the table and I have to prep for my second drive with my RAV4 tomorrow.

BOF.

[Gromit37]

I'm not excited... you should hear me when I am! ;-) I just like to pick holes in the "logic" some people use. I'm a RoSPA member, but I'm not blind to their faults either, but I'm still happy that I'm a better driver than I used to be 12 months ago. Live and let live I guess.

[WhoseGeneration]

Let me pose a question.
HMG decides to introduce a maximum speed limit of 56 mph across all previously NSL roads.
As has been mooted by the Greens in Europe.
The IAM response would be?
"This is not a sensible option".
Or, "This is a valid way of ensuring road safety and we fully support it and will continue to offer training in advanced driving".
Then, when the next move might be to 45 mph?

[vonhosen]

ipsg.glf said:

vonhosen said:

ipsg.glf said:

vonhosen said:

ipsg.glf said:

Vaux said:

ipsg.glf said:

Apparently they now have a scheme whereby people can become a member of the IAM without actually taking an advanced test. It is nothing to do with road safety but everything to do with cross-selling products and services to gullible people.

Another viewpoint could be that with a bigger membership base (Associates and Full Members), the IAM would have more clout in advising HMG on road safety issues.

Do you honestly think that if the IAM had 5m or 10m or 20m members it would make one jot of difference to HMG's Road Safety policy?

What driving club do you think has more clout or a higher profile ?
I personally think if they had 20m members they would have a hell of a lot of clout.

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 24th August 09:38

So road safety policy should be dictated by who has the largest organisation?

That's 20m voters, that's enough to get any governments attention.

If 20m pensioners got together & lobbied the government on childcare issues, they'd get listened to (as BOF says it doesn't mean they'll dictate, but they can influence).

You might not like that, but it's the way of the world. There is power with numbers who have a common cause.

Let's worry about what influence the IAM may or may not have when they get their 20m members.

I'm not worrying about it. It stands for any group in sufficient numbers.
I don't see any larger well known driving community committed to furthering driving standards beyond the basic test though.

[vonhosen]

WhoseGeneration said:

Let me pose a question.
HMG decides to introduce a maximum speed limit of 56 mph across all previously NSL roads.
As has been mooted by the Greens in Europe.
The IAM response would be?
"This is not a sensible option".
Or, "This is a valid way of ensuring road safety and we fully support it and will continue to offer training in advanced driving".
Then, when the next move might be to 45 mph?

I don't know.
What's their position on it ?

[SVS]

Hello everyone,

The IAM isn't in favour of reduced speed limits. Far from it. For example, it has been IAM policy for some time that the motorway limit should be increased from 70 to 80.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with everything IAM; I doubt there's a single large organisation with whose every policy you agree 100%. What does matter is that the IAM is the only well-respected road safety organisation with common sense. If you're a motoring enthusiast, I would encourage you to support the IAM (warts and all).

Cheers

[WhoseGeneration]

SVS said:

Hello everyone,

The IAM isn't in favour of reduced speed limits. Far from it. For example, it has been IAM policy for some time that the motorway limit should be increased from 70 to 80.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with everything IAM; I doubt there's a single large organisation with whose every policy you agree 100%. What does matter is that the IAM is the only well-respected road safety organisation with common sense. If you're a motoring enthusiast, I would encourage you to support the IAM (warts and all).

Cheers

A policy, 80 mph Motorway limit, that is still a policy then.
Shows how much influence with current HMG the IAM has, common sense or not.
I believe the Tories have, in the recent past, advocated such though.
The IAM is only tolerated by the current regime so long as it doesn't go "off message".
Look how we now see articles in the magazine about "Green" motoring.

[vonhosen]

WhoseGeneration said:

SVS said:

Hello everyone,

The IAM isn't in favour of reduced speed limits. Far from it. For example, it has been IAM policy for some time that the motorway limit should be increased from 70 to 80.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with everything IAM; I doubt there's a single large organisation with whose every policy you agree 100%. What does matter is that the IAM is the only well-respected road safety organisation with common sense. If you're a motoring enthusiast, I would encourage you to support the IAM (warts and all).

Cheers

A policy, 80 mph Motorway limit, that is still a policy then.
Shows how much influence with current HMG the IAM has, common sense or not.
I believe the Tories have, in the recent past, advocated such though.
The IAM is only tolerated by the current regime so long as it doesn't go "off message".
Look how we now see articles in the magazine about "Green" motoring.

Keep on bickering, the opposition won't.
I'd have thought looking for common ground is more sensible than differences.

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 24th August 23:40

[markmullen]

vonhosen said:

Keep on bickering, the opposition won't.
I'd have thought looking for common ground is more sensible than differences.

Bloody hell, I've found myself agreeing with VH!

He's right, shouldn't we, as motoring enthusiasts, support a group whose aim is to make the roads safer for motorists? That is why I give my time away for free as an IAM Observer to turn the kind of numpties who get under our wheels and impede our progress into the type of drivers we would like to see more of. If everyone on the roads was an Advanced Driver we'd all be able to get to our destinations quicker and with less stress and drama than we currently do.

[WhoseGeneration]

markmullen said:

vonhosen said:

Keep on bickering, the opposition won't.
I'd have thought looking for common ground is more sensible than differences.

Bloody hell, I've found myself agreeing with VH!

He's right, shouldn't we, as motoring enthusiasts, support a group whose aim is to make the roads safer for motorists? That is why I give my time away for free as an IAM Observer to turn the kind of numpties who get under our wheels and impede our progress into the type of drivers we would like to see more of. If everyone on the roads was an Advanced Driver we'd all be able to get to our destinations quicker and with less stress and drama than we currently do.

Part of my point about the IAM.
I too would want all to be of that standard, which would mean a further mandatory test meaning training by an ADI and a DSA conducted test.
Therefore the end of the IAM as an "observing" and testing organisation.
Would it want to commit "suicide"?

[markmullen]

WhoseGeneration said:

Part of my point about the IAM.
I too would want all to be of that standard, which would mean a further mandatory test meaning training by an ADI and a DSA conducted test.
Therefore the end of the IAM as an "observing" and testing organisation.
Would it want to commit "suicide"?

Its pretty much pointless speculation though as current driving tests are far from IAM level, plus there seems to be no move towards regular retests.

The only plans regarding driving tests on the board at the moment seem to be raising test age to 18 and making learners take a minimum number of ADI led driving lessons, something I don't agree with as I took one driving lesson, was taught by my dad at age 8 and passed my DSA test first time with two minors, I would have had to incur much more expense to learn to drive in the proposed way.

I think the current test should be revised to include more Advanced level techniques, I don't propose for example that a 17 year old learner should have to learn limit points or similar higher level stuff, just good observation, forward planning and positioning as opposed to the current trend to teach people meaningless guff about driving "greenly" which although it may possibly assist the environment in a small way does little to contribute to road safety.

[TripleS]

WhoseGeneration said:

Let me pose a question.
HMG decides to introduce a maximum speed limit of 56 mph across all previously NSL roads.
As has been mooted by the Greens in Europe.
The IAM response would be?
"This is not a sensible option".
Or, "This is a valid way of ensuring road safety and we fully support it and will continue to offer training in advanced driving".
Then, when the next move might be to 45 mph?

Based on what appears to have been their attitude so far I expect they'd just meekly accept it - just as the AA and RAC have been useless in standing up for drivers' interests, apart from during their very early days.

It makes me wonder just how dismal our driving climate is going to get - for all drivers, let alone the more spirited enthusiasts - before the light dawns and we call a halt to the dumbing down process and start tackling the subject a bit more brightly and positively, yielding benefits for all - except the utterly depressing control freak fraternity, but I'm not overly concerned about them.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

markmullen said:

WhoseGeneration said:

Part of my point about the IAM.
I too would want all to be of that standard, which would mean a further mandatory test meaning training by an ADI and a DSA conducted test.
Therefore the end of the IAM as an "observing" and testing organisation.
Would it want to commit "suicide"?

Its pretty much pointless speculation though as current driving tests are far from IAM level, plus there seems to be no move towards regular retests.

I think the current test should be revised to include more Advanced level techniques, I don't propose for example that a 17 year old learner should have to learn limit points or similar higher level stuff, just good observation, forward planning and positioning as opposed to the current trend to teach people meaningless guff about driving "greenly" which although it may possibly assist the environment in a small way does little to contribute to road safety.

I agree with that. It ought not to be too difficult to add the principal elements of advanced driving into the current basic driver training regime, incorporating things like COAST etc., but leaving out the silly nonsense about how you handle the steering wheel.

The objective should be that drivers acquire a style or range of styles that incorporate sensible techniques that work reliably for them, without others trying to be too prescriptive about the details.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[7db]

Does the IAM have a political wing?

[waremark]

The IAM acquired the AA Motoring Trust as the basis for a new research and advocacy wing at the start of 2007. See http://www.iam.org.uk/motoringtrust/news/latest_ne...

[waremark]

TripleS said:

markmullen said:

I think the current test should be revised to include more Advanced level techniques, I don't propose for example that a 17 year old learner should have to learn limit points or similar higher level stuff, just good observation, forward planning and positioning as opposed to the current trend to teach people meaningless guff about driving "greenly" which although it may possibly assist the environment in a small way does little to contribute to road safety.

I agree with that. It ought not to be too difficult to add the principal elements of advanced driving into the current basic driver training regime, incorporating things like COAST etc., but leaving out the silly nonsense about how you handle the steering wheel.

What's COAST? And why is it a nonsense to try to teach learners to steer from the start using a safe technique which should give them good control flexibility and smoothness? But that is a diversion from the main issues.

I am sure that most instructors do try to teach pupils good observation and forward planning. The introduction of the Hazard Perception Test was intended to ensure that this was the case. It is sad that most of us consider that it has been badly implemented and the introduction has not led to an improvement in novice driver accident stats.

However, you must be realistic about the level pupils can reach by the time they take the DSA Test. It is quite an achievement after a few hours driving to have good control of the vehicle and to be able to operate safely in traffic - and the current standard seems to me to be a very reasonable standard at which to be allowed to go and practise on your own. It is not reasonable to expect drivers with such limited experience to have the mental capacity to spare for the standard of observation anticipation and planning expected at advanced level.

If novice drivers would only maintain the standard they had to demonstrate on test they would be much safer. The casualties result when their confidence level grows faster than their skill level and they decide that they no longer have to be as careful or drive as 'sensibly' as they did on test.

I strongly support a multi-stage license process, where the existing DSA test is not the end of learning to drive but the start of a probationary period, with a test to something like the current IAM standard for conversion to a full license perhaps within two years. The need to focus on self-improvement over a protracted period would embed good driving practises more deeply in novices, and they would be taught advanced skills at a stage when they have mental capacity to spare from basic vehicle control. However, I don't think there are many instructors around with the capacity to teach to advanced level! I base this comment on the standard of driving seen by school cars with only one on board, and by reports of the standard of driving of instructors who join IAM groups as Associates.

[BOF]

Gromit37 said:

I'm not excited... you should hear me when I am! ;-) I just like to pick holes in the "logic" some people use. I'm a RoSPA member, but I'm not blind to their faults either, but I'm still happy that I'm a better driver than I used to be 12 months ago. Live and let live I guess.

Gromit,

I gave my RAV4 driver this afternoon a copy of my last RoSPA report...(One Silver and three Golds so far).SHE mentioned RoSPA as one of her two youngsters had heard of it on the young drivers scheme we run...her question was kind of ' Is it wrong to ask you about RoSPA?'

I tried my best to explain that, to my regret, RoSPA are very thin on the ground nationally, and that she should think of the IAM as 'O' levels...RoSPA as 'A' levels...that a few in my IAM Group could help her, or her kids, go for RoSPA...and that the three year re tests and the written reports (however formulaeic) ? are of value.

One day, we might have a Transport Minister who can get his arse out of the office, be taken to give the knock on the door with Von and his mates at midnight, get down to the level of IAM Observers, and the Trafpols who help us here...but don't hold your breath...too much 'joined up thinking' for them.

BOF.

[waremark]

BOF said:

I tried my best to explain that, to my regret, RoSPA are very thin on the ground nationally, and that she should think of the IAM as 'O' levels...RoSPA as 'A' levels...that a few in my IAM Group could help her, or her kids, go for RoSPA...and that the three year re tests and the written reports (however formulaeic) ? are of value.

I am a member of both organisations too, and I agree that all of the graded test results, the three year retests and the written reports offered by Rospa are of value. However, I do not go along with the idea that Rospa is a higher level. Within IAM, many develop their driving to a higher standard that the minimum required for an IAM Pass. Indeed, there are many in the IAM who would get Gold if they took the Rospa test. Within IAM, people are encouraged to develop their driving further through becoming Observers, and in due course probably they will take their Senior Observer test, and possibly the Special Assessment.

Is there a reason for IAM to avoid grading test results? Well, I think the graded results make the Rospa test a bit more intimidating and make the organisation a bit more elitist, which may put off some potential recruits.

And it is sure that IAM do much more for road safety. With their greater presence nationwide and much greater marketing activity they get many more people through the door. From a road safety point of view more is achieved by getting many up to a good standard of driving than by getting a few up to an even higher standard. And, in fact, as mentioned above, IAM does actually get many up to the higher standard anyway.

[BOF]

I agree, many of my IAM Associates could probably get Gold at first try with RoSPA.

My point was meant to be that too many drivers come to us, pass the IAM Test and drive around happy with the red sticker for the next twenty years...you must know how difficult it is to recruit new Observers, for example.

I point them towards RoSPA in the hope that they will continue to have an interest in safer, and more enjoyable, driving - I do not think that RoSPA is in any way better than the IAM, but it is the next step up the ladder, as things stand?

BOF.

PS - Form for Special Assessment mailed last week...much needed help from our Chief Observer and a retired Class 1.

[TripleS]

waremark said:

TripleS said:

markmullen said:

I think the current test should be revised to include more Advanced level techniques, I don't propose for example that a 17 year old learner should have to learn limit points or similar higher level stuff, just good observation, forward planning and positioning as opposed to the current trend to teach people meaningless guff about driving "greenly" which although it may possibly assist the environment in a small way does little to contribute to road safety.

I agree with that. It ought not to be too difficult to add the principal elements of advanced driving into the current basic driver training regime, incorporating things like COAST etc., but leaving out the silly nonsense about how you handle the steering wheel.

What's COAST? And why is it a nonsense to try to teach learners to steer from the start using a safe technique which should give them good control flexibility and smoothness? But that is a diversion from the main issues.

Hello Mark, sorry about the delay.

I'm surprised you're not aware of what COAST is all about. Obviously you've missed all the times my friend WC has been banging on about it (I'd better not say banging away, as she's already got five! ) but basically it means:

Concentration - and Courtesy towards (and Consideration for) other road users,
Observation,
Anticipation,
which enables us to have
Space, and
Time,
in which to deal comfortably with whatever we need to cope with.

With regard to steering, some people, as I'm sure you know, get quite anal about the handling of the steering wheel, and this is something I'm quite sensitive about, especially after my encounter with one particular IAM observer. On my first (and with him, only) observed drive he made a great fuss because I didn't hold the steering wheel in a way that he deemed satisfactory - despite the fact that I had already been driving and getting pretty good results for 48 years! As far as I was concerned he was about the worst possible advert for the IAM, and not the sort of chap I can work with at any price. I can't quite remember his name now - Ian Morris/Riley/Wolseley - or something like that; anyhow I expect Mark M will know him, just in case anybody wishes to know who to steer clear of.

Best wishes all,
Dave.