A short lived romance!
Discussion
Dave,
I wish I could encapsulate quite what it is that's so impressive when one sits alongside the best drivers. I can't. If I had to point to two things, they would be:
(a) Complete mastery of the car, the conditions and themselves from the outset, even in a strange car. There is, apparently, no "learning curve" while they adapt to a new gearbox, different power and torque curves or left hand drive etc. It all looks utterly effortless.
(b) A very taut sense of pace. Every safe opportunity is taken to make progress (within whatever speed limits the driver has set him/herself) but the drive feels utterly consistent. There are no "fast bits" and no "slow bits" only a seamless flow even if the driver's choice is to use all the revs and all the gears.
I hope people don't jump in and say "But what about..." because, as I admitted above, I really can't put my finger on what separates the merely very accomplished (say your average police class 1) from the truly great (some of the police instructors who have driven me, some HPC members, maybe some the regulars here?). And I'm afraid I'm only talking about road driving. I've nowhere near enough track time to make meaningful judgements there.
Sorry not to be more helpful.
James
I wish I could encapsulate quite what it is that's so impressive when one sits alongside the best drivers. I can't. If I had to point to two things, they would be:
(a) Complete mastery of the car, the conditions and themselves from the outset, even in a strange car. There is, apparently, no "learning curve" while they adapt to a new gearbox, different power and torque curves or left hand drive etc. It all looks utterly effortless.
(b) A very taut sense of pace. Every safe opportunity is taken to make progress (within whatever speed limits the driver has set him/herself) but the drive feels utterly consistent. There are no "fast bits" and no "slow bits" only a seamless flow even if the driver's choice is to use all the revs and all the gears.
I hope people don't jump in and say "But what about..." because, as I admitted above, I really can't put my finger on what separates the merely very accomplished (say your average police class 1) from the truly great (some of the police instructors who have driven me, some HPC members, maybe some the regulars here?). And I'm afraid I'm only talking about road driving. I've nowhere near enough track time to make meaningful judgements there.
Sorry not to be more helpful.
James
Nick_Chim said:
Slightly suprised by this Judith, as you know Emma and I are IAM observers, neither of us could be accused of being preachy? can we? 
All I can say is try it - we're all volunteers, and no-one is perfect, but we try our best. Some of us do have coaching experience from away from IAM...
The introduction 4 years ago of the 'qualified observer' and 'senior observer' gradings are an attempt to bring an element of standardisation and focus on the quality of the assistance given by observers.
PS we're not allowed to 'teach' or 'instruct'; we observe, comment and suggest!
The £85 comprises the "how to be an advanced driver manual", the test booking and examiners expenses, and the 1st year's membership. IMHO more formal training in teaching would put that cost up significantly for it to have any effect on the quality of tuition.
I guess I'm saying if you want consistent and professional tuition, buy a professional, otherwise, give us a try - happy to debate these things with you once you've tried it!
Next Notts Trent course starts 18 April - places still available!!!
>> Edited by Nick_Chim on Wednesday 5th April 21:27
The point I was making is that being a good driver does not necessarily make you a good observer/teacher. But thank you for the 'qualified observer/senior observer' expanation. And I don't believe I accused you or Emma of being preachy, I said the people who came that evening were preachy. But reading back I think I used the wrong words. Their presentation while on the surface was interesting and worthy, had a definite flavour of condescension in the way it was delivered which rankled.
I was trying to illustrate that this did them no favours whatsoever and made you feel as if you did not want to be involved with what they were trying to do. Yeah, people are sensitive when you criticise their driving (me included). Is it any wonder as to drive you need confidence. When confidence is undermined, peoples reactions vary. But a common reaction is resentment and I would suggest this is the emotion that prevents people from doing any advanced driver training - what do they bloody know etc...and many people simply can't get over themselves (possibly me included
). Having said that, both myself and Judas are interested in coming on the 18th, I will chat offline with Em to see what this entails.
Regards
Ace-T
PS The name's Tracy not Judith
TripleS said:
You have said that you want to learn some of the traffic officers skills....
Not true.
It *is* true, and if I could be bothered to go and dig out the post where you said it I would post it here.
No Mark, I don't think so, but ...
Yes Dave, I know so, but you have it your way if you like.
TripleS said:
It would be no use me saying I want to learn some of their skills, as there is no facility that would allow me access to such training, even if I were ever to be good enough to make any progress at that level. It simply is not a realistic objective for me.
Well actually there *are* such facilities. They are called the IAM, RoADAR, HPC, Ride Drive, Don Palmer etc. and any one of them will teach you the same foundation that is taught on a police advanced course. It's called The System of Car Control and you can find it in 'Roadcraft'.
TripleS said:
It is possible that I may have said it would be nice to have such skills, and of course it would, but it could never be attained.
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
mefoster said:
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Dave sounds like he is willing to change things within his driving style that offer demonstrative benefit, he just wants to be allowed to ignore changing those things that he believes are adequately catered for already within his driving style. He wants to learn more rather than change what works already.
With such a student, if you think his current practices need changing, you are going to have to put him in situations where his use of current practices compromises his ability & then he will see for himself there is a need for change. But if he copes will with those situations with current practice, then the only reason he would need to change would be in order to pass a test (that is going to be to a more rigid syllabus) & I don't think Dave is about that.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 8th April 07:14
vonhosen said:Well put vh, only speaking for myself here of course but that's a damn good post.
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Dave sounds like he is willing to change things within his driving style that offer demonstrative benefit, he just wants to be allowed to ignore changing those things that he believes are adequately catered for already within his driving style. He wants to learn more rather than change what works already.
With such a student, if you think his current practices need changing, you are going to have to put him in situations where his use of current practices compromises his ability & then he will see for himself there is a need for change. But if he copes will with those situations with current practice, then the only reason he would need to change would be in order to pass a test (that is going to be to a more rigid syllabus) & I don't think Dave is about that.
turbobloke said:
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Dave sounds like he is willing to change things within his driving style that offer demonstrative benefit, he just wants to be allowed to ignore changing those things that he believes are adequately catered for already within his driving style. He wants to learn more rather than change what works already.
With such a student, if you think his current practices need changing, you are going to have to put him in situations where his use of current practices compromises his ability & then he will see for himself there is a need for change. But if he copes will with those situations with current practice, then the only reason he would need to change would be in order to pass a test (that is going to be to a more rigid syllabus) & I don't think Dave is about that.
Yes Bernard, it is indeed a very fair representation of my general feeling, so thank you Von.
I suppose I am by nature fairly conservative, and generally not happy with revolutionary changes. I'm much happier with steady evolutionary progress, building on what we already have, and adjusting it as appropriate, rather than discarding things too readily. There are times when the best plan is demolition, followed by a completely fresh start, but I honestly do not think that would work in this case.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Dave sounds like he is willing to change things within his driving style that offer demonstrative benefit, he just wants to be allowed to ignore changing those things that he believes are adequately catered for already within his driving style. He wants to learn more rather than change what works already.
With such a student, if you think his current practices need changing, you are going to have to put him in situations where his use of current practices compromises his ability & then he will see for himself there is a need for change. But if he copes will with those situations with current practice, then the only reason he would need to change would be in order to pass a test (that is going to be to a more rigid syllabus) & I don't think Dave is about that.
Yes Bernard, it is indeed a very fair representation of my general feeling, so thank you Von.
I suppose I am by nature fairly conservative, and generally not happy with revolutionary changes. I'm much happier with steady evolutionary progress, building on what we already have, and adjusting it as appropriate, rather than discarding things too readily. There are times when the best plan is demolition, followed by a completely fresh start, but I honestly do not think that would work in this case.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
which is why back on page 2 I commented as follows
"accentuating the positives, bringing in the negatives gradually, so you pick things up not because "I've been told this is the way" but because "Yes I can see the sense in that!"
FiF
who is now off to J Sainsbury's finest emporium
(still Mrs FiF's staff discount makes the monthly shopping pill easier to swallow)
TripleS said:
I suppose I am by nature fairly conservative, and generally not happy with revolutionary changes. I'm much happier with steady evolutionary progress, building on what we already have, and adjusting it as appropriate, rather than discarding things too readily. There are times when the best plan is demolition, followed by a completely fresh start, but I honestly do not think that would work in this case.
Dave, from my personal experience (I only passed last July), I don't imagine that you will for one moment have to make what you deem to be revolutionary changes, unless, of course, your driving is particularly poor. I somehow doubt that that is the case. I would say that your experience would be one where you build on your existing knowledge to develop your driving skills further still, making you more analytical in your approach to every aspect of driving. The development of a deeper understanding of the mechanics of driving together with a heightened awareness of your surroundings will enable you to become a superior driver through effective and efficient handling and planning.
(I must confess that I have not read all of this thread.)
vonhosen said:
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Sorry, I simply don't see how that is possible. You cannot run before you can walk and without the basics you cannot master the finer points. Your own golf analogy being a perfect example.
Still, if everyone here is happy to let Dave believe differently then who am I to argue. I just don't think you're doing him any favours. Just my 2penneth.
mefoster said:
You CAN get a good deal of the way there BUT...
... first you have to be prepared to change and start with the basics.
*THAT* is where you have a problem and the only thing that makes it an unrealistic objective.
Perhaps Dave doesn't want to change the basics, he is just interested in picking up finer points.
There are people well versed in Roadcraft/Advanced driving who will impart that knowledge, without forcing someone to adhere to roadcraft's basic teachings before that.
Sorry, I simply don't see how that is possible. You cannot run before you can walk and without the basics you cannot master the finer points. Your own golf analogy being a perfect example.
Still, if everyone here is happy to let Dave believe differently then who am I to argue. I just don't think you're doing him any favours. Just my 2penneth.
This does perplex me a little. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
I am not undermining what roadcraft is or stands for by saying that roadcraft instructors will never say that it is the only valid driving method.
It is essentially a tool developed for a particular purpose. Because the Police service want Police officers to drive cars using exemptions, that puts them at higher risk. The Police service has to cover it's back in relation to that & offer training that equips them to do that job safely. No Police officer will be allowed to drive Police vehicles using exemptions without that training. That puts the Police service in a powerful position to be very prescriptive about the way Police officers will drive Police cars. You have to pass a test showing that you can do it safely & competently in the prescribed manner. If you don't, you don't drive Police cars using exemptions. If you pass the test & then later have a collision your driving will be examined against the prescribed manner & if found wanting it could lead to prosecution or discipline.
If Dave doesn't use roadcraft steering methods, but never the less maintains absolute control of the vehicle in all circumstances, why should that preclude him from him seeking or getting advice on different aspects (say positioning for example) within roadcraft ?
Don't get me wrong at all, Roadcraft in it's entirety is an excellent tool, I stand by it & drive to it. If everybody did, then our roads would be a much safer & pleasant place to be.
But to exclude someone from developing only certain aspects of their driving further, because they are not willing to change totally, is a nonsense. It doesn't have to be all or nothing (unless you are going to be sitting a stringent prescribed test).
By seeking to learn & change things that he realises he could be doing better, it is doing him a favour. Doing nothing because he'd have to change everything, is what doesn't do him any favours.
Remember the 3 handicap golfer was still a good golfer by any standards, he just wasn't as good as he could be. Perhaps DAve is pretty happy with his standard & only wants to tinker, having no desire to reach dizzy heights that may involve a lot of money, time & work. No good driver will ever be as good as they want to be either, no matter how much training they've had. They'll always seek improvement. It's when you stop trying to improve & think you've done it that decline starts. Getting to the standard is one thing, maintaining & improving on it is another.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 8th April 22:57
Von - I am again obliged to you for your understanding of my position and your calm, measured response.
If the IAM and RoADA etc. were able to adopt some of your approach I think they could have a lot more customers and achieve rather more than they are currently doing. Maybe that is wishful thinking on my part and there might be good reasons why that can not be done, but I just don't know.
Mark - I am sorry to find myself again at cross purposes with you, but I feel you are making up your mind too rigidly and finally, and on insufficient evidence, and, with respect, that is not a strong position to take IMHO. I fully accept that experience alone, even very long experience, does not by itself necessarily prove much. I'm sure it is possible for someone to drive for many years and cover a lot of miles, and apparently keep out of trouble, but they might still be quite a poor driver if their success is due to the vigilance and skill of their fellow road users. Even so, I do object to your insistence that in automotive terms I have not yet learned to walk, and I will not wear that.
There is no doubt in my mind that Von and Mark are both experts, but their differing approaches are very clear, and I know which I think is most constructive - at least in my case.
I really don't want this topic to be a source of friction and upset, but it would be nice if a few people could extract some benefit from the points that emerge. In particular I hope that those who are contemplating doing advanced driver training will go ahead with it and not be put off by the problems I encountered - and perhaps partially caused!
Finally, I do wish Von could feel able to give the PH community some idea of what his work entails, aided by a suitably robust disclaimer of course. Differences of view on speed limits, for example, would of course remain, but I think it would open a few eyes.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
If the IAM and RoADA etc. were able to adopt some of your approach I think they could have a lot more customers and achieve rather more than they are currently doing. Maybe that is wishful thinking on my part and there might be good reasons why that can not be done, but I just don't know.
Mark - I am sorry to find myself again at cross purposes with you, but I feel you are making up your mind too rigidly and finally, and on insufficient evidence, and, with respect, that is not a strong position to take IMHO. I fully accept that experience alone, even very long experience, does not by itself necessarily prove much. I'm sure it is possible for someone to drive for many years and cover a lot of miles, and apparently keep out of trouble, but they might still be quite a poor driver if their success is due to the vigilance and skill of their fellow road users. Even so, I do object to your insistence that in automotive terms I have not yet learned to walk, and I will not wear that.
There is no doubt in my mind that Von and Mark are both experts, but their differing approaches are very clear, and I know which I think is most constructive - at least in my case.
I really don't want this topic to be a source of friction and upset, but it would be nice if a few people could extract some benefit from the points that emerge. In particular I hope that those who are contemplating doing advanced driver training will go ahead with it and not be put off by the problems I encountered - and perhaps partially caused!
Finally, I do wish Von could feel able to give the PH community some idea of what his work entails, aided by a suitably robust disclaimer of course. Differences of view on speed limits, for example, would of course remain, but I think it would open a few eyes.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
vonhosen said:
If Dave doesn't use roadcraft steering methods, but never the less maintains absolute control of the vehicle in all circumstances, why should that preclude him from him seeking or getting advice on different aspects (say positioning for example) within roadcraft ?
I'm not talking about things like steering. I am talking about the core of roadcraft, the system itself. If you don't have a systematic approach then you don't have a sound base upon which to build the rest. Dave does not drive to the system. No, I have not been in a car with him but it is my deduction from the many exchanges we have had in various forums.
vonhosen said:
Don't get me wrong at all, Roadcraft in it's entirety is an excellent tool, I stand by it & drive to it. If everybody did, then our roads would be a much safer & pleasant place to be.
If you stand by it then you will remember this paragraph from it.
"THE SYSTEM OF CAR CONTROL IS A SYSTEM OR DRILL, EACH FEATURE OF WHICH IS CONSIDERED, IN SEQUENCE, BY THE DRIVER, AT THE APPROACH TO ANY HAZARD. It is the basis upon which the whole technique of good driving is built." [Their caps]
How can someone work on the finer points of positioning, steering, braking, acceleration when it is being done out of context.
vonhosen said:
But to exclude someone from developing only certain aspects of their driving further, because they are not willing to change totally, is a nonsense. It doesn't have to be all or nothing (unless you are going to be sitting a stringent prescribed test).
By seeking to learn & change things that he realises he could be doing better, it is doing him a favour. Doing nothing because he'd have to change everything, is what doesn't do him any favours.
Fine, I agree, but we're not talking about changing everything, we're talking about establishing a solid foundation and it doesn't matter whether it is a police advanced course or a DSA test, that foundation is essentially the same. It is a systematic approach that boils down to position, speed, gear (and don't overlap unless necessary and part of the plan).
I honestly don't believe that there is much benefit to teaching the finer points of positioning etc. if the approach is inconsistent or if the gear is taken halfway through the hazard or whilst still applying steering lock. The driver will get far more benefit (and so would everyone around him) if those things were addressed first.
And therein lies the problem. Dave is resistant to change. He believes that he has something that works, for him and he is unwilling to be told that in order to order to get to point B you must start from point A rather than some point off to the side of A. There is no need to "start again" or "change everything". Just put aside all the years of experience he has, correct the foundation and then put that experience back. The difference now is that all that experience can be seen in a better context and it might well only need minor adjustements here and there.
vonhosen said:
Remember the 3 handicap golfer was still a good golfer by any standards, he just wasn't as good as he could be. Perhaps Dave is pretty happy with his standard & only wants to tinker, having no desire to reach dizzy heights that may involve a lot of money, time & work.
It's still a good analogy. The golfer has a basic flaw in his game and in order to take a step forwards he must take a step backwards. Like the golfer, Dave can tinker all he likes but I really can't see that it is going produce any real imrovement unless the foundation is improved.
vonhosen said:
No good driver will ever be as good as they want to be either, no matter how much training they've had. They'll always seek improvement. It's when you stop trying to improve & think you've done it that decline starts. Getting to the standard is one thing, maintaining & improving on it is another.
I have no argument with that at all.
TripleS said:
Finally, I do wish Von could feel able to give the PH community some idea of what his work entails, aided by a suitably robust disclaimer of course. Differences of view on speed limits, for example, would of course remain, but I think it would open a few eyes.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
I'll think about it some more, but people inevitably do start making those assumptions.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff