RE: Advanced driving: Putting Reg Local to the test
Discussion
Gemaeden said:
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.
But however gently you can stop even if you didn't anticipate the hazard before seeing it, you can still stop even more gently if you deduce that it's likely in advance. I cannot see any justification for ignoring a clue as to what is waiting just out of sight. You might as well say that if you always drive at a safe speed there is no point in ever using full beam at night.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.
The argument against tailgating is that if the vehicle in front stops you crash into it.
Gemaeden said:
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.
An example of someone either driving too fast to stop in the distance seen to be clear or possibly just not looking where he is going, in which case it is an argument for more observation not less.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.
Gemaeden said:
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.
I suspect it'll come down to a balance of risk against reward, based on the drivers's perception of the likeliness and potential severity of a threat. Being quite a bit slower round 9,999 corners so I don't drop my pipe in my lap on the 10,000th feels unnecessary, as long as I'm satisfied that those 0.01% of occasions don't result in contact.In that situation, I may feel that someone daft enough to stop round a blind bend on fast road had forfeited the expectation of not being made anxious.
As a check on this, it's interesting to review a drive from the perspective of interactions with potentially vulnerable road users. If I've had a drive where I felt I'd made good use of the potential of the road, but every one of the walkers, cyclists and horse riders that I'd come across had been dealt with appropriately, than that suggests the balance is about right. If I were to panic a pony, bother a bike or worry a walker, then I'd be having a stern word with myself.
Gemaeden said:
If one is prepared to accept hard braking, then what is the arguement against tailgating on a country road.
For starters:1: You have almost no time to react, so if the car in front were to stop suddenly you couldn't guarantee to stop too.
2: Number 1 also means that you have no chance to manage your slowing to take account of anyone behind, so you're also more likely to get hit from the rear if you do stop.
3: People don't like being tailgated, and if your presence distracts the other driver then they're more likely to drive erratically
4: Being close to the vehicle in front restricts vision, so you won't see the overtake opportunity which is developing up ahead
5: If you do go for a pass, the car you're overtaking knows you're a dick and may be more likely to obstruct you
Gemaeden said:
... I now tell this story to all my clients to explain why I teach my version of 'advanced' driving.
That's a shocking thing to be involved with, but it seems pretty obvious that the driver in question wasn't able to stop in the distance they could see. As such, it's not relevant to what we're discussing here.If you'd arrived on scene and found the guy had simply soaked his shorts in sangria or had singed his strides with a misplaced meerschaum, then it would have been altogether less serious.
There's nothing at all wrong with choosing to go a bit slower to maximise reaction time and minimise the severity of any braking, but I'd argue that it's not an essential part of being 'advanced'.
Edited by S. Gonzales Esq. on Monday 7th May 18:39
ash reynolds said:
An IAM course will teach you this, they're all like Reg.
b
ks they are!About 18 months ago, I started a thread about our eldest who had just passed his test and was driving like a loon:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=16...
As well as everything else we did, I also got him to spend an entire weekend, 2 full days, with Reg Local. When we told little QQ1 he had to do this course to get his keys back, his first reaction was a moderate hissy fit and a lot of sulking combined with being even grumpier than his usual teenage self. Us saying "have fun!" to him, and genuinely hoping he would have fun, as we left him in Reg's care only resulted in an unrecognisable grunt as would be expected from most teenagers.
After he had finished the first 8-hour day and we met up to collect him, there couldn't have been a bigger contrast in his mood. Although he was quite tired, he was grinning from ear to ear having enjoyed every second he spent in Reg's company, and he was looking forward to his second day. After the second day was finished, he was absolutely knackered but still grinning, and a little sad that the weekend had finished.
On our return home, his driving couldn't have been more different. In town, through the villages and at school, he was suddenly driving with the wisdom of a much more experienced driver, and on our surrounding country lanes, his driving competence had improved immensely. We needed to go somewhere in two cars with him driving in front of me and I was very impressed with how he was driving on every aspect of his driving I could observe from his road positioning, to how he took corners - quite fast but with excellent lines and obviously very competent.
All in all, my wife and I feel very grateful to Reg for turning our slightly loony teenager into a wise and competent driver, capable of pushing his car to have some fun, but doing it in a responsible and competent manner. Little QQ2 is now 17 and learning to drive himself; unfortunately he just failed his first attempt. Once he passes, we won't be waiting for him to be observed driving like an idiot; one of the first things I will be doing after getting his insurance sorted is getting in contact with Reg again so that LQQ2 gets the same treatment as LQQ1. Indeed, LQQ3 is a little way off being 17 just yet, she's only 6 at the moment, but I sincerely hope that Reg will still be around in 11 years' time to teach her too!
Reg Local, you, sir, are absolutely amazing. Anyone who compares IAM stuff to the training you give to drivers hasn't got a clue. Many, many thanks from me and Mrs QQ!
and may I just say, LQQ2 is very much looking forward to spending some time with you. In fact, he's been waiting since we picked up LQQ1 after his first day with you!Gemaeden said:
A harrowing anecdote.
Gosh, I'm sorry that you went through that, that someone died and that children had to see. 
I take your point, but it's all a bit binary. There is a middle ground between being utterly smooth and causing a crash. Sacrificing a smidgeon of smoothness in order to make more progress, while remaining safe- we're not talking skidding to within an inch of a stopped car here, just breaking a little more rapidly than one would if everything were in plain sight- isn't the same as being risky.
Usual PH bks.
I've read Reg Local's book. At some point I'd love some time out with him - he is very clearly someone who knows his stuff.... and drives in a lovely part of the country as well...
I'm a bit confused though... My daily drive is a 2.0 Transit Custom Auto.... Worthwhile or not?
Another photo of the same world as the original article...
ks. I've read Reg Local's book. At some point I'd love some time out with him - he is very clearly someone who knows his stuff.... and drives in a lovely part of the country as well...
I'm a bit confused though... My daily drive is a 2.0 Transit Custom Auto.... Worthwhile or not?
Another photo of the same world as the original article...
surveyor said:
I'm a bit confused though... My daily drive is a 2.0 Transit Custom Auto.... Worthwhile or not?
QuickQuack said:
surveyor said:
I'm a bit confused though... My daily drive is a 2.0 Transit Custom Auto.... Worthwhile or not?
yes it would be of value for you, transit or otherwise
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.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?
blearyeyedboy said:
There is a middle ground between being utterly smooth and causing a crash. Sacrificing a smidgeon of smoothness in order to make more progress, while remaining safe
My mantra is "Safety, Smoothness, Progress". One gives up Progress first, then Smoothness. If you have to give up Safety then something has gone enormously wrong in the observation and planning...Porkymerc said:
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
Maintaining balance is about maximising the stability of the vehicle when steering. Even if this is at speeds below both the legal and the roadholding limit - and there are bends which you can't take safely at anywhere near the legal limit - it adds to smoothness and safety. It's nothing to do with how much grip you have, IMO.And if you've planned things so you're on the gas to maintain stability in a bend, you're in an ideal position to accelerate when the bend finishes, and the old codger in front of you struggles to pull away in 5th while you waft majestically past...
Edited by dvenman on Tuesday 8th May 13:14
CS Garth said:
Is the author not the highly esteemed Mel Nichols (his name doesn't appear on the piece other than the book tip at the end)?
If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
No, he isn't Mel Nichols! Although you are correct that his first name isn't Reg... Would sir like a If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
? 
He does have his own books out though:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Advanced-Performance-Driv...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Not-Crash-Reg-Local/d...
I find it bizarre that PH have gone out with Reg Local and then plugged someone else's books. Why on earth would you do that?! Especially as Reg's books are about the topic in hand whereas Mel Nichols's book, entertaining though it is, isn't really about improving one's driving skills.
GC8 said:
Is Reg Local a real name or a non de plume? I am certain that I bought RLs book, but cant find it anywhere...
The latter. akirk said:
hooblah said:
To be honest, everything that was mentioned in the article I do anyway. I haven't had training, just common sense?
I like driving fast and getting from point a to b in the shortest time possible. Years of doing that has wisened me to potential dangers and hazard perception. I taught myself to heel-toe when I started driving, and I have my road positioning down to a tee.
I can imagine how an inexperienced driver or a non-enthusiast could find this beneficial, but just how beneficial would something like this be to someone like me?
So back to your point... I don’t think that the driver exists who has nothing left to learn, if you think that is where you are then either you have no hunger to learn (which is fine and acceptable) or you are yet to understand what is possible...I like driving fast and getting from point a to b in the shortest time possible. Years of doing that has wisened me to potential dangers and hazard perception. I taught myself to heel-toe when I started driving, and I have my road positioning down to a tee.
I can imagine how an inexperienced driver or a non-enthusiast could find this beneficial, but just how beneficial would something like this be to someone like me?
I can thoroughly recommend a session with him. I defy anyone to come away having learned nothing from the experience. I had a half day (afternoon) with him last summer and it was worth every penny.
A whole day with him is what I would really like. However as I live south of the Thames it's too far unless I can twist my sister's arm to provide me with bed and board overnight.
QuickQuack said:
CS Garth said:
Is the author not the highly esteemed Mel Nichols (his name doesn't appear on the piece other than the book tip at the end)?
If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
No, he isn't Mel Nichols! Although you are correct that his first name isn't Reg... Would sir like a If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
? He does have his own books out though:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Advanced-Performance-Driv...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Not-Crash-Reg-Local/d...
I find it bizarre that PH have gone out with Reg Local and then plugged someone else's books. Why on earth would you do that?! Especially as Reg's books are about the topic in hand whereas Mel Nichols's book, entertaining though it is, isn't really about improving one's driving skills.
Reg Local said:
QuickQuack said:
CS Garth said:
Is the author not the highly esteemed Mel Nichols (his name doesn't appear on the piece other than the book tip at the end)?
If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
No, he isn't Mel Nichols! Although you are correct that his first name isn't Reg... Would sir like a If so stop mucking about Mel and get the next volume out the first was excellent.
? He does have his own books out though:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Advanced-Performance-Driv...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Not-Crash-Reg-Local/d...
I find it bizarre that PH have gone out with Reg Local and then plugged someone else's books. Why on earth would you do that?! Especially as Reg's books are about the topic in hand whereas Mel Nichols's book, entertaining though it is, isn't really about improving one's driving skills.
dvenman said:
blearyeyedboy said:
There is a middle ground between being utterly smooth and causing a crash. Sacrificing a smidgeon of smoothness in order to make more progress, while remaining safe
My mantra is "Safety, Smoothness, Progress". One gives up Progress first, then Smoothness. If you have to give up Safety then something has gone enormously wrong in the observation and planning...I agree with the Smoothness and then Progress bit as a truism, but there are limits. I'm not on about rashly throwing all other principles down at the altar of Progress here... more that being 95% as smooth (imperceptible to some) but making a lot more progress might be an acceptable trade-off? Or am I being naive here? (I'm happy to be told if so; I'm still learning at the foothills of Advanced Driving!)
blearyeyedboy said:
dvenman said:
blearyeyedboy said:
There is a middle ground between being utterly smooth and causing a crash. Sacrificing a smidgeon of smoothness in order to make more progress, while remaining safe
My mantra is "Safety, Smoothness, Progress". One gives up Progress first, then Smoothness. If you have to give up Safety then something has gone enormously wrong in the observation and planning...I agree with the Smoothness and then Progress bit as a truism, but there are limits. I'm not on about rashly throwing all other principles down at the altar of Progress here... more that being 95% as smooth (imperceptible to some) but making a lot more progress might be an acceptable trade-off? Or am I being naive here? (I'm happy to be told if so; I'm still learning at the foothills of Advanced Driving!)
neither is necessarily right or wrong as long as it is in control, safe and any passenger is happy... however, for the majority of drivers who lack smoothness, it is not a style choice, but a lack of ability, so pursuing smoothness initially is a good step in learning. As the musician who plays syncopated jazz can switch to a classically trained elegant style, so the good driver has choice, those who don’t and simply deliver a discordant mess are at a much lower level than they probably think!
There is an argument that there is no trade off between smoothness and progress. Because progress is ultimately limited by the need to avoid running out of grip either on cornering or braking for the unexpected, and smoothness makes the most of your grip. The way it was explained to me was that if someone gives you a heavy weight and allows you to take the strain gradually you are less likely to drop it than if you grab it suddenly.
I think there is a grain of truth in it, though sometimes a less than smooth change in position might be worthwhile in terms of improving visibility.
I think there is a grain of truth in it, though sometimes a less than smooth change in position might be worthwhile in terms of improving visibility.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff