RE: Advanced driving: Putting Reg Local to the test

[S11Steve]

I did the IAM Skills for Life test a good few years back, after having my licence for 12 years. I think I learned more in that 6 week period than I had since passing my test.

A lot of it is common sense, but it's not apparent until it's pointed out, and used together on every journey.

[Wills2]

I spent half a day with an ex police driver years ago it was a course that the business I worked for ran for anyone driving on company business.

Most people would benefit from this kind of instruction.

[syl]

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

I know that we don't have any civilian Examiners in the South West yet, which could explain that.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I'm not sure why it would it a problem to use ex-Police examiners?

Not a problem to use them at all. My problem was that they only used them - everyone else was thought not to be up to the required standard, including the people that the organisation itself had trained. That would make me have doubts about the ability of the organisation to train - and therefore if I wanted training, I ought to offer my money to whomever trains the police drivers instead.

It sounds like this is being addressed at IAM (but not RoSPA), although there isn't mention on the national website (or it is buried) and it's contradicted by local websites and Wikipedia.

[syl]

akirk said:

Sadly the truth...

I would like to see fines / points / SAC for speeding replaced with a compulsory 1/2 day or day of this type of tuition...
not because those speeding are all bad drivers - but because I think it would be far more constructive than the current system - and certainly some bad drivers would then become self-selecting

It would definitely be a great improvement on the speed awareness course. Even if they have to charge considerably more.

[waremark]

syl said:

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

I know that we don't have any civilian Examiners in the South West yet, which could explain that.

I don't want to derail the thread, but I'm not sure why it would it a problem to use ex-Police examiners?

Not a problem to use them at all. My problem was that they only used them - everyone else was thought not to be up to the required standard, including the people that the organisation itself had trained. That would make me have doubts about the ability of the organisation to train - and therefore if I wanted training, I ought to offer my money to whomever trains the police drivers instead.

It sounds like this is being addressed at IAM (but not RoSPA), although there isn't mention on the national website (or it is buried) and it's contradicted by local websites and Wikipedia.

We have a civilian IAM examiner locally who so far as I know has only been trained through IAM. However, the level of expertise about driving of someone who has had many weeks of professional further driver training (i.e. the holder of a police advanced driving ticket) is bound to be greater than that of someone only trained by the IAM - the relative scarcity of IAM trained examiners doesn't mean IAM training is no good, just that it is very unlikely to be anything like as complete as the training a police driver has had.

[waremark]

hooblah said:

I don't claim to know everything, but I am curious as to what there is that I don't know. That gives me a starting point. Thanks.

Even top sportsmen have coaches. I would be astonished if you took a day with a top professional driving coach and didn't feel you got good value.

[waremark]

akirk said:

Reg Local said:

akirk said:

It is for the coach

£150
8 hour day, and by the time you have added on the fluff each end, and perhaps time writing a report afterwards etc. you could be up to 10 hours

so £15 - £20 p/h which is not far above pay for a cleaner or equivalent job in some areas...
doesn't seem a lot for someone at the top of their field...

No, it doesn't, however, said coach may be motivated by a number of factors other than profit:

It may be more of a hobby than a full-time job;
They may wish to contribute - in a small way - to helping enthusiasts stay safe on the roads & would not like price to be a factor which may put people off;
Lower prices would allow them to remain local & offer training on their own terms.

Just speculating of course, in relation to this hypothetical coach...

and all the coaches I have met have also been lovely people...
but I would still want them to get a fair pay for their work

of course a lot of people through IAM etc. give their time as observers free of charge, but here is a difference between those people and the professional coach...

when people are prepared to spend c. £1k a day at Palmer Motorsport, then spending even £3-400 for a day with a top end coach shouldn't be an issue...

I have always found it surprising that guys at the very top of the driver coaching field are so 'cheap' but people who will spend many thousands of a cosmetic upgrade to their supercar just don't realise the value they could get from time on the public road with one of these folk. It would help them use their supercar better and enjoy it more. That being the case, the driver coaches just would not get any work if they charged an amount which would be considered reasonable for a high level professional in any other feel.

I am sure Reg is not the only top driver coach who does it to a large extent for reasons other than to make money. However, his prices appear to be a particular bargain for his clients.

[waremark]

Interesting that in talking about the driver training he has had from big names, Mel Nicholls listed mainly famous racing drivers. Actually, I think he probably had a lot of training in road driving, but training in track driving is a very different discipline.

[Gemaeden]

waremark said:

I have always found it surprising that guys at the very top of the driver coaching field are so 'cheap'...

Maybe they're cheap beacause they are located in the North

waremark said:

. That being the case, the driver coaches just would not get any work if they charged an amount which would be considered reasonable for a high level professional in any other feel.

Some of us do, but maybe that's because we cover the South East, and we also teach people from scratch when requested, so they don't have to spend years driving less than optimally.

Now to possibly upset some people, because Reg is a popular figure on Pistonheads and I'm an infrequent poster

I find it strange that no-one has questioned what would have happened in the original article's photographer scenario if the photographer had just got back into their car. There would have been no observational pre-warning.

Would Reg have gotten the OP's daughter to slow down for a blind bend in case of a parked car, or would there have been panic braking. If the former is the case then there is no need to mention seeing the photographer, if the former is not the case why wasn't she being prepared for a blind bend?

Edited by Gemaeden on Friday 4th May 20:08

[Porkymerc]

I did my AD a couple of years back with Bolton and District IAM. As an enthusiast I was keen to find out what the course would teach me and where I would be critical of it etc.

I have long thought that even though compared to some other countries our driving standards are ok I seem to find that whenever I make a road journey I find that there are many drivers who simply are not fully concentrating on their driving. Motorways are full of people who think that lane one is just for commercial vehicles and their car will explode if they drive in it except when then join or leave the motorway. Observation of bus lane signs, almost universally ignored. Those drivers who do 35 in a 40 zone then carry on doing 35 when it changes to a 30 limit. I don't need to go on really do I?

What the IAM course did for me was to train my brain to observe many more of the road signs than I did previously. It goes very deep. I was advised to observe the bus stop signs to note how many different bus numbers travelled that route and if anyone was waiting at the stop. This would help deduce the likelihood of encountering bus traffic and therefore required preparation. I still don't understand why most changes of speed limit when turning into another road are signed so that they are in the last place you would be looking when turning a corner and not repeated 50 yards into the new road.

My Dad taught me to drive and his main lesson to me was teaching good anticipation of everyone else's driving as well as what your own vehicle will do in differing road and traffic conditions. This skill of anticipation is not taught when learning to pass the test. So many people pass and carry on driving with a very limited awareness of everything going on around them.

Getting back to the IAM course, I found that some of the content related to Roadcraft methods were unnecesary. IAM have a strict policy of not exceeding the speed limit so how it could be necessary to always control the vehicle to maintain "balance" when the vehicle is not going to be anywhere near roadholding limits during normal legal speed driving. If you are to teach people to balance any vehicle then you have to allow them near the limit so as to teach them to feel what happens there and react accordingly. EFAD training does this for driving under blue light conditions where it is much more likely the driver will get near the limits of the vehicle.

Having driven LGV's, motorcycles for over twenty years and cars for nearly thirty I am of the opinion that anyone given a licence to drive a car should have to pass an LGV or Motorcycle equivalent test. These tests are conducted much more rigourously and require the driver/rider to exhibit the level of skill that all drivers should be capable of. The awareness level would be much higher and surely this would contribute to safer driving across the board?

[Sunnysider]

I had half a day out with Reg last spring in my 911 then a further full day in my Boxster a couple of months later, and was very impressed with his instruction.

He’s calm, intuitive, logical and very much safety minded, but he taught me to drive very quickly but safely on public roads in a remarkably short period of time, and he’s made me a much more competent yet relaxed driver.

I couldn’t recommend Reg highly enough, so much so that I bought my eldest son a half day out with him as a gift.

Edited by Sunnysider on Friday 4th May 22:07

[blearyeyedboy]

Gemaeden said:

I find it strange that no-one has questioned what would have happened in the original article's photographer scenario if the photographer had just got back into their car. There would have been no observational pre-warning.

Would Reg have gotten the OP's daughter to slow down for a blind bend in case of a parked car, or would there have been panic braking. If the former is the case then there is no need to mention seeing the photographer, if the former is not the case why wasn't she being prepared for a blind bend?

The fact that a photographer was seen is nether necessary nor sufficient for the driver. But that doesn't make the observation useless, either by itself or as part of a bigger teaching point.

The photographer was additional information that might suggest a hazard but not the only reason for being cautious approaching a blind bend. Remember when we were all taught to be wary if a ball bounces out between parked cars, in case a child follows? That wasn't an invitation to drive like an idiot in built-up areas if a bouncing ball wasn't seen; it was an additional prompt to warn the driver that something may be not quite right here. The photographer acts as a welcome reminder to slow for a bend, but the bend should still be slowed for.

As a broader point, the art of observation is a psychomotor skill to be practiced in the same way as many other skills involved in driving. Learning to notice photographers who are out of place will make the art of observation more skilled and likely to happen naturally in future, in the same way that practicing rev matching when you don't need to on a flat and open road makes you better at practicing the skill for a time when you do.

This phenomenon of improving safety because of improving the practice of observational skills is demonstrated when you examine cyclist deaths per capita around the world. It is thought that in countries where more cyclists are, drivers expect to see them and therefore fewer cyclists are killed per capita. Stats may be found referenced in this article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/02...

[leeg123]

Lots to like here may I recommend an old book?

Very Advanced Driving by the curiously named A Tom TopperI seem to have read somewhere it was controversial in it's day but is so real world delivered by word and I reckon it has saved my life at least once!

[Gemaeden]

blearyeyedboy said:

Gemaeden said:

I find it strange that no-one has questioned what would have happened in the original article's photographer scenario if the photographer had just got back into their car. There would have been no observational pre-warning.

Would Reg have gotten the OP's daughter to slow down for a blind bend in case of a parked car, or would there have been panic braking. If the former is the case then there is no need to mention seeing the photographer, if the former is not the case why wasn't she being prepared for a blind bend?

The fact that a photographer was seen is nether necessary nor sufficient for the driver. But that doesn't make the observation useless, either by itself or as part of a bigger teaching point.

The photographer was additional information that might suggest a hazard but not the only reason for being cautious approaching a blind bend. Remember when we were all taught to be wary if a ball bounces out between parked cars, in case a child follows? That wasn't an invitation to drive like an idiot in built-up areas if a bouncing ball wasn't seen; it was an additional prompt to warn the driver that something may be not quite right here. The photographer acts as a welcome reminder to slow for a bend, but the bend should still be slowed for.

Which was my point, "More brakes please Georgia" implies that Georgia wasn't braking sufficiently for the bend, Reg shouldn't have to mention the parked car or observation if the entry speed is too high.

It is generally agreed that automatisation of a task resulting in a lower cognitive load is what enhances success.

Observation in this context should be kept very basic. The simple skill for an inexperienced driver should be to know whether the exit of the bend is visible, clear and can be safely negotiated at the present speed.

If the answer to any of these is "no" then the car should be slowed down sufficiently before steering commences, irrespective of whether there are clues or not as to what might be hidden.

That of course ties in with the idea of not driving quickly in urban areas whether bouncing balls are visible or not.

[blearyeyedboy]

Gemaeden said:

It is generally agreed that automatisation of a task resulting in a lower cognitive load is what enhances success.

Point taken, but the visual reminder of the photographer and car are narrative examples that use different parts of your memory and reduce cognitive load, enhancing learning and retention.

Hence my example of the ball. We're not only taught it for its own ends, but it's a narrative that you, I and most of the people reading this will have remembered. (You knew exactly the story that you, I and pretty much every learner driver has been told, didn't you? ) The narrative learning about bouncing balls contributes to people driving slower in built up areas even when there's no ball to see.

Georgia will slow down more for blind bends after that example than she would have done if she'd just been told to slow for a random blind bend.

I consider myself a modestly OK driver trying to be an advanced one, but I do a lot of adult education. Building in narrative examples to show why principles matter is quite a useful teaching method.

Edited by blearyeyedboy on Sunday 6th May 16:16

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

Hopefully we're all driving so we could stop in the distance available should we need to. If that's the case then I suspect the difference in the speed carried by individual drivers is down to how hard a stop they're prepared to accept, should the worst occur.

It's entirely possible that the driver in question was travelling at a speed that would have allowed them to stop, but the margin provided by that additional observation link turned it from a firm spill-your-cocktail kind of stop into one that simply risked displacing the umbrella from the glass.

An obstruction round a blind bend is a rare event, and personally I'm OK with the idea of using uncomfortably hard braking should it occur. Having said that, I then devote my full attention to observing everything I can to make those events as rare as possible. The OP is a good example of how that can work.

I once heard about a driver who was sceptical about the need for advanced observation, stating that as long as they could stop in the distance they could see then looking any further up the road was pointless. I sometimes wonder what it'd be like riding in their car on a country road.

[Dr Jekyll]

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

It's entirely possible that the driver in question was travelling at a speed that would have allowed them to stop, but the margin provided by that additional observation link turned it from a firm spill-your-cocktail kind of stop into one that simply risked displacing the umbrella from the glass.

+1

[MC Bodge]

leeg123 said:

Lots to like here may I recommend an old book?

Very Advanced Driving by the curiously named A Tom TopperI seem to have read somewhere it was controversial in it's day but is so real world delivered by word and I reckon it has saved my life at least once!

I didn't like that book.

I preferred the John Lyon books and Mind Driving.

[Estate]

A good read I’m looking forward to my half day with Reg out on the roads next week!

[Gemaeden]

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

Hopefully we're all driving so we could stop in the distance available should we need to. If that's the case then I suspect the difference in the speed carried by individual drivers is down to how hard a stop they're prepared to accept, should the worst occur.

It's entirely possible that the driver in question was travelling at a speed that would have allowed them to stop, but the margin provided by that additional observation link turned it from a firm spill-your-cocktail kind of stop into one that simply risked displacing the umbrella from the glass.

An obstruction round a blind bend is a rare event, and personally I'm OK with the idea of using uncomfortably hard braking should it occur. Having said that, I then devote my full attention to observing everything I can to make those events as rare as possible. The OP is a good example of how that can work.

I once heard about a driver who was sceptical about the need for advanced observation, stating that as long as they could stop in the distance they could see then looking any further up the road was pointless. I sometimes wonder what it'd be like riding in their car on a country road.

In my opinion a driver should never need cocktail spilling braking as a response to an unseen hazard such as the one described, which can be planned for. For a deer leaping out from the side of the road or similar obviously yes, but not for something already on the road which could be avoided.

To me 'advanced driving' means that speed should be reduced so that it is largely completed before any hidden hazard is revealed. Any further reduction of speed should not need to be harsh, otherwise I would call it reactive rather than proactive and therefore not advanced.

That's not to say that I am against 'making progress', including the use of hard deceleration, but to my mind this should never entail inducing anxiety in other road users.

If one is prepared to accept hard braking, then what is the arguement against tailgating on a country road.

It is precisely the fact that obstructions around bends are such rare events that make them dangerous. As mentioned in a previous post about cyclists.

As an example, I was first on the scene at a crash a couple of years ago. I was on an A road and had been overtaken about a mile or so before hand by someone doing at least 50 toward the end of a 30 zone. A short while later I arrived at a right left double bend. The vehicle that had overtaken me had come round the second part of the corner to find another vehicle stationary waiting to turn into a driveway on the right, with an oncoming car in the other lane. The consequences were fatal to the person who overtook me and wrote off the other two vehicles, as well as being very shocking for all concerned. The oncoming car contained a family with two young children aboard.

I had been down the road hundreds of times before and never seen anyone emerge from or enter the drive, and quite possibly neither had the dead man, who was relatively local.

I now tell this story to all my clients to explain why I teach my version of 'advanced' driving.