Discussion
mefoster said:
As for me being a police driver, no I'm certainly not, but I would like to be able to acquire some of their skills. Unfortunately there seems to be no legitimate way of doing that for the ordinary civilian driver.
Well, actually there is. Both the IAM and RoSPA will teach you to drive to The System. If you're willing to learn then you WILL "acquire some of their skills". Once you've got the basics right you can move on.
Hello Mark - I'm afraid we're going to disagree again here, because I think you're making some unfounded assumptions, but let's try and clear it up a little.
1. The police driving skills I'm referring to are likely to be rather more advanced and specialised than anything that normal members of the IAM or RoSPA are likely to have.
2. What makes you so sure that I do not already drive in reasonable accordance with The System?
3. You seem to be very sure that given a willingness to learn on my part (which I can assure you is present) I 'WILL acquire some of their skills'.
4. Again, why are you so sure (given that we have never met, let alone done any driving together) that I have not yet got the basics right?
With all due respect Mark, your approach seems to be based on too many assumptions, but I find a lot of people are doing this when talking to people who are not yet full members of the IAM or RoSPA etc. They often say that doing the IAM course will...make your driving smoother, you'll be safer, you'll be more observant, you'll get more out of yourself, you'll get more out of your car, you'll make better progress, you'll have lower maintenance costs etc. What gets me is that there never seems to be any doubt about it - whoever you are you will improve immensely in these respects! OK then, let us consider this.
A chap comes along expressing interest in joining the IAM. You don't know who he is, what his background is, what his job is or was, or anything about his driving ability, but you still give him all this story about how much better he is going to be. Then in due course you find out that he is actually a currently serving or recently retired Police Traffic Officer, Class One qualified and all that. How are you then going to feel about how you've judged his driving, long before checking anything whatsoever about his real level of ability? If I had talked down to somebody along those lines, and then found out that he was actually a brilliant and highly qualified driver, I would feel a bit of an idiot. Wouldn't you?
Now I don't know what my level of ability is, as it has never been examined since September 1957 when I passed my basic driving test. It might be good, bad or indifferent - perhaps in due course we'll get some proper measure of it. In the meantime all I will say is that I enjoy trying to make a good job of driving, and always have done, and it appears to give good results in all the areas in which I am apparently destined to make spectacular improvements, seemingly with no doubts about it! Let's wait and see shall we?
I'm sorry Mark, I'm not really wanting to have a go at you, but I'm a bit tired of people making what purport to be firm judgements based on little or no reliable information, and I think that is foolish and unhelpful.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
I'm sorry Mark, I'm not really wanting to have a go at you, but I'm a bit tired of people making what purport to be firm judgements based on little or no reliable information, and I think that is foolish and unhelpful.
You are admittedly untested since 1957 and there is plenty of [anecdotal] evidence upon which to form an opinion about your driving. Our previous discussions about roadcraft and The System give me a pretty good idea that you have not "got the basics right" yet. Further, the fact that you are so insistent that they must be open to, what can only be regarded as, learning from you in return gives me a pretty good impression of your approach. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps I'm right, either way I am NOT making value judgements based on knowing *nothing* about you.
Hope that helps. :-)
omegac said:
1. The police driving skills I'm referring to are likely to be rather more advanced and specialised than anything that normal members of the IAM or RoSPA are likely to have.
Can I ask what skills you mean?
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
This is perhaps an outmoded way of looking at it, but in my opinion one is not an advanced driver without the ability to drive fast and safely on public roads in a normal range of traffic conditions, and to me 60-70 mph is most certainly not fast. The conventional view seems to be that IAM members (having passed the IAM test) are advanced drivers. In my opinion they are not, and as I have said before, there is very little in their book "How to be an Advanced Driver" that strikes me as being particularly advanced at all.
I will readily accept that mine is very much a minority viewpoint, but there we are. HTH.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
>> Edited by TripleS on Friday 17th February 19:47
TripleS said:
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
Ok, I wasn't sure if you meant pursuit or blue's and two's.
TripleS said:
The conventional view seems to be that IAM members (having passed the IAM test) are advanced drivers.
Having joined (and very quickly left) my local IAM observers group, I have to agree with you. The standards were nothing like I expected, and I felt it was little more than the blind leading the blind as far as advisor and associates went.
omegac said:
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
Ok, I wasn't sure if you meant pursuit or blue's and two's.
TripleS said:
The conventional view seems to be that IAM members (having passed the IAM test) are advanced drivers.
Having joined (and very quickly left) my local IAM observers group, I have to agree with you. The standards were nothing like I expected, and I felt it was little more than the blind leading the blind as far as advisor and associates went.
Standards vary from group to group. They also vary from Observer to Observer.
Some Observers are total driving enthusiasts and spend their waking moments trying to improve. The IAM Test represents an early start to these people - not the conclusion to their journey. Other Observers are people who got through (just) and now want pay back the favour done them by their volunteer colleagues.
Get through an IAM test, Dave. You will learn something: you may or may not value it - that is down to you. If you think its not good enough then volunteer, become an Observer and try to CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTER!
That's what I'm about at the minute.
Don said:
Standards vary from group to group. They also vary from Observer to Observer.
Hi Don...I tried to talk to the Chief observer and offer some input, but they weren't particularly interested. I have now gone to ROSPA to do observing for them, and so far have been much more impressed with what I have seen.
As there are 3 levels of ROSPA, I would have thought it makes more sense to do ROSPA and at least be graded, what are your thoughts?
TripleS said:
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
This, sadly, is something that is a great issue for the IAM - and is discussed ad nauseam in the pages of "Advanced Driving" and so on.
Recognising that drivers will drive significantly above the speed limit should we be attempting to practice and teach skills that apply at those speeds. For example - truly high speed driving on the motorway. Or should we limit ourselves to commenting on the skills and practicing them legitimately below the speed limit - never exceeding it.
Well, THE LAW, says WE MUST do the latter. The IAM would be disbanded, destroyed and senior officers arrested if they suggested, for even a moment, that we, as members and Observers, should practice high speed driving on the public roads. Our examiners, CLASS 1 POLICE DRIVERS, many CURRENTLY SERVING would be forced to ARREST US!
So. For now. We may comment during the drive that IF we were travelling above the 70mph limit the same rules of Observation, Anticipation and Planning would apply but with additional margin for error given the greater stopping distances involved and so on but that's where it must stop.
Sad but true. Wishing it were otherwise is pissing in the wind. Me? I practice very high speed driving on the track. Its not the same. The Observation, Anticipation and Planning I do may be the same things but the manouevers I'm planning are utterly different. Oh well...there we go...that's the way it is.
omegac said:
3 levels of ROSPA, I would have thought it makes more sense to do ROSPA and at least be graded, what are your thoughts?
I've done ROSPA. Got a Gold. They're exactly the same as the IAM: which is to say I respect the members of our local ROSPA group and admire what they're out to do. If your local ROSPA group was more impressive than your local IAM group that's just one of those things...it varies from Group to Group and Observer to Observer, sadly.
HPC, now, they're different. Looking forward to them...
>> Edited by Don on Friday 17th February 19:24
mefoster said:
I'm sorry Mark, I'm not really wanting to have a go at you, but I'm a bit tired of people making what purport to be firm judgements based on little or no reliable information, and I think that is foolish and unhelpful.
You are admittedly untested since 1957 and there is plenty of [anecdotal] evidence upon which to form an opinion about your driving. Our previous discussions about roadcraft and The System give me a pretty good idea that you have not "got the basics right" yet. Further, the fact that you are so insistent that they must be open to, what can only be regarded as, learning from you in return gives me a pretty good impression of your approach. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps I'm right, either way I am NOT making value judgements based on knowing *nothing* about you.
Hope that helps. :-)
Well thank you Mark, but I'm sorry to say it doesn't help a lot. I particularly note that you have conveniently failed to acknowledge the nonsense of your superior attitude in relation to the 'novice' who turns out to be a Class 1 police driver.
If you wish you can, of course, set out whatever anecdotal evidence you have regarding my driving, and your evidence for concluding that I have not got the basics right, but how you can do this without any practical assessment being carried out remains a mystery to me.
As for me expecting that IAM (for example) people should be willing to learn from me, let me simply put it this way. None of us know all there is to know about every little detailed aspect of driving, all the little tricks and refinements etc., and therefore we are all learners and should accept that. What I object to is the notion that IAM people are going to do all the telling, and I am expected to do all the listening and agreeing, and to accept that whenever there is a difference of opinion they will always be right and I will always be wrong. If that proves to be their stance, that would be indicative of arrogance on their part, a factor which has kept me from involving myself with them until this past few weeks. Clearly a lot of other people feel the same way about them, and they also keep their distance for the same reason. This is something that the IAM will have to face up to, and I hope they will. They will simply have to if they are to optimise the good work they could do in the interests of the driving community, and road safety in general.
By contrast, over on Traffic Answers is a gentleman who is a real expert*, who will explain things from a position of great expertise, and very interesting and helpful it is too. Despite his extremely high level of knowledge in this subject he does not seek to talk down to any of us. He accepts whatever contributions are made, including those from me, and suggests where we're getting it wrong if he thinks that is the case, but he also gives us credit when we add something useful to our debates, unlike your approach, I'm sorry to say.
You are (in my opinion) still attempting to form a judgement on an unsound basis, but I don't expect you can be shifted from that stance, so I shall not pursue it any further with you. Drive carefully. :-)
Best wishes all,
Dave.
* not only a Hendon police driving instructor, but one who instructs and examines the instructors, and runs various highly specialised advanced driving courses. In other words a real expert, and a gentleman.
omegac said:
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
Ok, I wasn't sure if you meant pursuit or blue's and two's.
TripleS said:
The conventional view seems to be that IAM members (having passed the IAM test) are advanced drivers.
Having joined (and very quickly left) my local IAM observers group, I have to agree with you. The standards were nothing like I expected, and I felt it was little more than the blind leading the blind as far as advisor and associates went.
Oh well it's interesting, but to me rather saddening, that you say that, though perhaps some groups are better than others. As a matter of fact I would like the IAM to succeed better than they seem to be doing at present, especially with regard to young drivers, but their Max Power scheme (or whatever they call it) doesn't sound to be making much headway, which is largely why I have changed my mind and decided to join and try to help in some way.
My first observed drive is planned for next Tuesday afternoon, 21 February, so we'll see what happens then. In any case I'll let you know how things go. I may owe a few folk some apologies, in which case they'll get them, but we're not at that point yet.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Don said:
Standards vary from group to group. They also vary from Observer to Observer.
Some Observers are total driving enthusiasts and spend their waking moments trying to improve. The IAM Test represents an early start to these people - not the conclusion to their journey. Other Observers are people who got through (just) and now want pay back the favour done them by their volunteer colleagues.
Get through an IAM test, Dave. You will learn something: you may or may not value it - that is down to you. If you think its not good enough then volunteer, become an Observer and try to CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTER!
That's what I'm about at the minute.
Yes that's fair enough Don. I recognise you as an enthusiast.
As for the IAM test - I wonder if I can put on an act good enough to pass, because there will undoubtedly be some aspects where I'll struggle to maintain sufficient compliance with their rigid way of doing things.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
I particularly note that you have conveniently failed to acknowledge the nonsense of your superior attitude in relation to the 'novice' who turns out to be a Class 1 police driver.
That would be because it has absolutely no connection to me whatsoever. That is a strawman introduced by you. And a rather crude one at that.
[snip]
TripleS said:
By contrast, over on Traffic Answers is a gentleman who is a real expert*, who will explain things from a position of great expertise, and very interesting and helpful it is too. Despite his extremely high level of knowledge in this subject he does not seek to talk down to any of us. He accepts whatever contributions are made, including those from me, and suggests where we're getting it wrong if he thinks that is the case, but he also gives us credit when we add something useful to our debates, unlike your approach, I'm sorry to say.
Very good, I too know people just like him with exactly the same qualifications. Your willy waving is not very impressive. You may like to note that there is still no practical assessment; it's still all based entirely on text exchanges. Get out there and get in the car with someone suitably qualifed sitting next to you. Trust me, you will learn... no matter what your own opinion of your competence and you certainly won't have to drive at very high speeds to do it.
TripleS said:
You are (in my opinion) still attempting to form a judgement on an unsound basis, but I don't expect you can be shifted from that stance, so I shall not pursue it any further with you.
As I pointed out. I have formed my opinion based on our previous conversations and the information you provide about yourself. If you say that's unsound then so be it but until such times as you have actually taken some extra training and passed at least one of IAM, RoSPA or some other advanced driving test or assessment you're not really in any position to comment on how good or otherwise it may or may not be.
... and on that note, we had better break and return to a neutral corner.
Don said:
I'm talking about driving safely at high speeds on public roads, a skill which for forty years now no civilian drivers have had any legitmate way of acquiring.
This, sadly, is something that is a great issue for the IAM - and is discussed ad nauseam in the pages of "Advanced Driving" and so on.
As you well know, I started out long before the NSL abomination was imposed on us, so I became accustomed to learning about driving at higher speeds. When the rules were changed I carried on as before. I still do. That's it.
Keep a good lookout folks!
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
As for the IAM test - I wonder if I can put on an act good enough to pass, because there will undoubtedly be some aspects where I'll struggle to maintain sufficient compliance with their rigid way of doing things.
You shouldn't have to "put on an act", it should all be quite natural and what you should be taught is far from "rigid". Hopefully you'll get an observer that can get that across.
It is probably the most common criticism that I hear from ill informed people. "The IAM/RoSPA/System is too rigid". One thing that I hope you find sooner rather than later is that The System is anything but "rigid".
>> Edited by mefoster on Friday 17th February 20:09
TripleS said:
...we had better break and return to a neutral corner.
Yes I think so. It is rather like uk.rec.driving all over again.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
And there was me getting the popcorn ready...
One thing does seem to jump out at me in both sides of the argument - namely in what way the 'system' changes when one has made the conscious decision to exceed the speed limit laid down in the RTA. The idea that by sticking to the 60 mph general limit you are somehow limiting your capabilities is in my extremely humble opinion, wrong. Advanced driving is a state of mind, not some magical number on a speedometer. Assuming that organisations such as the IAM or RoADAR (or whatever they are calling themselves this week
) cannot equip someone with suitable abilities is wrong. Yoiu should always start with abilities and develop the speed (if that's what you want and by the way, I don't believe that speeding is an arrestable offence - at least it wasn't until the law changed on Jan 1st) rather than starting out with speed and develop the abilities to match it. That said, any client of mine who spends too much time looking at the speedometer ensuring that they don't go over 60 mph tends to get short shrift - their £10 of concentration is far better served chucking their vision down the road rather than looking at a plastic needle six inches in front of their face.
StressedDave said:
...we had better break and return to a neutral corner.
Yes I think so. It is rather like uk.rec.driving all over again.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
And there was me getting the popcorn ready...
One thing does seem to jump out at me in both sides of the argument - namely in what way the 'system' changes when one has made the conscious decision to exceed the speed limit laid down in the RTA. The idea that by sticking to the 60 mph general limit you are somehow limiting your capabilities is in my extremely humble opinion, wrong. Advanced driving is a state of mind, not some magical number on a speedometer. Assuming that organisations such as the IAM or RoADAR (or whatever they are calling themselves this week
That said, any client of mine who spends too much time looking at the speedometer ensuring that they don't go over 60 mph tends to get short shrift - their £10 of concentration is far better served chucking their vision down the road rather than looking at a plastic needle six inches in front of their face.
Aye well, I'm sorry to disappoint you Dave. Perhaps you can save some of the popcorn for another time, but I will think more carefully about what you said in the remainder of your post.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff