Speed awareness course feedback
Discussion
havoc said:
- What if Archie had been looking and planning ahead rather than just blindly at the car in front? (or worse, his mobile phone in his lap)
- What if Archie had (rather more sensibly than your artficial example) left a bigger gap to the car in front?
- What if the cars in front weren't all braking at the limit because they too had all been utter muppets who'd left too short a gap to the car in front that they were myopically focused on.
But this is the point that I think is trying to be made, isn't it? The feedback from many seems to be how badly other people on the course grasp the basics of driving, so telling them that they need to leave a bigger gap when they are going faster AND the consequences of not leaving a bigger gap, might just help them out?- What if Archie had (rather more sensibly than your artficial example) left a bigger gap to the car in front?
- What if the cars in front weren't all braking at the limit because they too had all been utter muppets who'd left too short a gap to the car in front that they were myopically focused on.
Shakermaker said:
But this is the point that I think is trying to be made, isn't it? The feedback from many seems to be how badly other people on the course grasp the basics of driving, so telling them that they need to leave a bigger gap when they are going faster AND the consequences of not leaving a bigger gap, might just help them out?
I'd have said so. There is no point going in too deep with Joe Public havoc said:
vonhosen said:
If you are comparing the effects of initial speed it makes sense to do that where the other factors are consistent, then the effects of initial speed (alone) are consistent across the board for everybody.
ie whatever vehicle you're personally driving, in whatever conditions, with whatever reaction time you are going to be carrying a higher residual speed than you probably appreciated at the point where you'd have stopped had you been travelling at a slower initial speed (in those conditions with that reaction time).
That's in practice, not theory.
Then it's not relative to me or anyone else, it's solely about the effects for you with varying initial speeds you are carrying.
IN PRACTICE, you are almost certainly going to be doing a broadly similar speed (+/- 5-10mph) than the car in front in the sort of give-and-take traffic that is most likely to require an emergency stop vis-a-vis 'the car in front', which is where this exchange started. Very few people on a M-way or trunk road barrel-along at 20-30mph more than the surrounding traffic, IF there is traffic. ie whatever vehicle you're personally driving, in whatever conditions, with whatever reaction time you are going to be carrying a higher residual speed than you probably appreciated at the point where you'd have stopped had you been travelling at a slower initial speed (in those conditions with that reaction time).
That's in practice, not theory.
Then it's not relative to me or anyone else, it's solely about the effects for you with varying initial speeds you are carrying.
And if they're blind enough not to spot cars up ahead going slower, then, braking distance or not, the issue is observation as much as it is excess speed. Oh, and planning too. Those two things which are critical to safe driving but we don't actively teach drivers in this country!
Other circumstances are also those which require observation and planning above all else - people joining from side-roads, unexpected hazards, sudden braking for a turn without indicating etc.
...and in those circumstances surely it's more important to have a driver educated to be able to 'read the road' and plan ahead, than someone who's more interested in making sure they're obeying the (arbitrary) limit?!?
SMIDSY is a bigger cause of accidents than excess speed (as per those old police statistics which rounded everything together to get to the "one third" lie - not sure what it's going to be now, but suspect worse still after 20+ years of 'speed kills' and one-dimensional enforcement...not to mention many-more distrations in the car). But SMIDSY is difficult to police, so it doesn't get policed.
(...and then we get more and more draconian mobile phone laws, which are all well and good but are bugger all use if there are no coppers out there TO police them...no good waving a bigger and bigger stick if you're never around to use it...)
So...remind me...exactly WHY were we worrying about braking distances again?!?
Merely that the illustration is valid for what it is pointing out.
It's a speed related point being illustrated on a speed awareness course, pointing something out to them that they mostly aren't aware of/underestimate after all.
Ste372 said:
My current car is the first with a speed limiter. I regularly set it to 70. I see many a car fly past me at 80+ but still only end up slightly in front of me in the queues when coming off the motorway maybe prob 10-15 miles down the road.
This, and switching from music to podcasts was the biggest reason for me to slow down. I once drove nearly 300 miles from Northamptonshire to Plymouth, doing about 85mph when I could. I noticed the same car (which never left the middle lane the entire way), which sat at about 65mph, would always catch me up when traffic slowed down through temporary road works or motorway merges. We both entered Plymouth at the same time, despite me trying to go faster for 3-4 hours. Pointless.The other gain is improved fuel economy. Trying to drive fast on dual carriageways or motorways is just painful. Especially during peak times - someone is always in your way. It's far easier to sit in lane 1, slowly undertake all the middle lane zombies and arrive at your destination a bit more relaxed, while saving fuel that can be used on more interesting roads.
Acehood said:
This, and switching from music to podcasts was the biggest reason for me to slow down. I once drove nearly 300 miles from Northamptonshire to Plymouth, doing about 85mph when I could. I noticed the same car (which never left the middle lane the entire way), which sat at about 65mph, would always catch me up when traffic slowed down through temporary road works or motorway merges. We both entered Plymouth at the same time, despite me trying to go faster for 3-4 hours. Pointless.
The other gain is improved fuel economy. Trying to drive fast on dual carriageways or motorways is just painful. Especially during peak times - someone is always in your way. It's far easier to sit in lane 1, slowly undertake all the middle lane zombies and arrive at your destination a bit more relaxed, while saving fuel that can be used on more interesting roads.
When it is busy, yes, the right lanes tend to bunch up/tailgate and speed up/slow down, with no benefit to average speed and increased risk of being rear-ended. In these situations, I tend to stay further left.The other gain is improved fuel economy. Trying to drive fast on dual carriageways or motorways is just painful. Especially during peak times - someone is always in your way. It's far easier to sit in lane 1, slowly undertake all the middle lane zombies and arrive at your destination a bit more relaxed, while saving fuel that can be used on more interesting roads.
When dual carriageways and motorways are clear, though you can of course maintain a higher speed and your average speed can be significantly higher if you choose a higher cruising speed. I can think of a few times (memorable because they are rare!) when I have maintained a decent average speed on a long motorway journey and got to my destination around an hour quicker than normal.
Driving erratically, with speed and gap in front yo yoing, is the sign of a poor driver.
SAC did have an effect on me , which I had not anticipated. I have always been good at complying with 20 and 30 limits, 40 sometimes and , within reason, I regarded all others as advisory . I used to decide when not to break the limit but now I make a conscious decision when to do break it -meaning I tend to be much more alert to the risk of getting caught. And what is the point of risking being fined for doing, say, 64 in a 60 ?
I did one, interesting but a few weeks later got caught speeding again, so didn't really change my behaviour. First 2 in 20 years driving but I think it's more a case of being lucky.
My one, an old bloke argued with everything said, it was quite frustrating for the presenters. Who ended up having a word.
My one, an old bloke argued with everything said, it was quite frustrating for the presenters. Who ended up having a word.
No! It irritated me- everyone in any aspect of life makes mistakes. This was a point that was deemed unthinkable by the people running the course (as nice as they were).
Despite my many spirited drives I got caught in an area I was unfamiliar doing 39 in a 30 having just come out of a 40 area.
Clearly I missed the sign and my fault entirely, however, heaven forbid it’s acknowledged as an easy mistake to make.
I found the day patronising and irritating. One thing I would say is the people running it did make it as enjoyable and friendly as such an event could be.
Despite my many spirited drives I got caught in an area I was unfamiliar doing 39 in a 30 having just come out of a 40 area.
Clearly I missed the sign and my fault entirely, however, heaven forbid it’s acknowledged as an easy mistake to make.
I found the day patronising and irritating. One thing I would say is the people running it did make it as enjoyable and friendly as such an event could be.
havoc said:
Gojira said:
You are the smug git who brought up your qualifications....
I did it to stop Twitthet
t from having a go saying I didn't know what I was talking about.The point of the example is to demonstrate to the average punter why they should consider slowing down, instead of just telling them to slow down. Most people have not a clue that a small difference in initial speed (35 instead of 30) means a large difference in terminal speed at a set point down the road (18 instead of zero). For a lot of people, it's a bit of an eye opener.
And the whole point of the course is to get people to slow down.
I did a Smart Motorway Course a year or so ago, so now I stick rigidly to the posted limit on smart motorways. The rest of the time I drive as I've always done- more or less sticking to the limit around built-up areas and not bothering too much on open roads
The course was OK, educational and not at all preachy, as the guy said "everyone speeds"
The course was OK, educational and not at all preachy, as the guy said "everyone speeds"
Mine had the obligatory guy, who argued the toss on every available occasion. The AA guy reminded him that although it was neither a pass or fail course they could still fail him
I actually thought Mr argumentative had quite a few valid arguments, specifically the 30mph, 35mph stopping topic. His argument was that glancing at your speedo every few seconds and worrying about speeding was a lot worse than driving a few mph over the limit and being fully aware of your surroundings. Presenter scowled, but offered no opinion. He went on to annoy AA guy even more when he started talking about stopping speeds from the Highway Code being very dated for a modern car. His argument was the Top Gear episode where Clarkson proved it in some Luxo barge, presenter said it was all staged and under normal circumstances it wouldn’t happen, to which the guy replied well how did they get the actual distances for the Highway Code
Biggest issue for me (sitting quietly smiling at the back) was a real life scenario the presenter brought up. He showed a photo of typical B road in the countryside where the road broached the brow of a hill, flanked by hedges either side and displaying two road signs. First sign was a national speed limit, followed by an oncoming right turn sign. He said, a car has broached the brow of the hill, legally doing 60mph, to be surprised by another car stopped 100yds down the road waiting to turn right. Apparently the car hit the waiting car, pushing it directly into an oncoming lorry and instantly killing the stopped car driver. He then went on to ask us what we thought appropriate for the situation. Obvious answer from ourselves was to slow down before going over the brow, but Mr argumentative took it as a perfect opportunity to get a few points, by suggesting the authorities and all those involved in making the roads a safer place (aimed at AA guy) being held responsible as the national speed limit was inappropriate (I agreed with him). So, after another little tit for tat between them (he probably added an extra 20min’s to the SAC) the AA guy came up with his default answer and had me scratching my head. He said, you should slow appropriately (agree) and if you find a car the other side waiting to turn right, stop at the brow and switch your hazard lights on, once the car has turned right proceed on your journey. Mr naughty was up in arms asking what speed was appropriate to be able to stop at the brow without having to reverse, instructor, 10mph. This led to, “surely driving at 10mph on a national speed limit road is very dangerous?” but he was having none of it. It still has me thinking today what could of avoided the collision (obviously speed), but stopping on a main national speed limit road isn’t the answer
I actually thought Mr argumentative had quite a few valid arguments, specifically the 30mph, 35mph stopping topic. His argument was that glancing at your speedo every few seconds and worrying about speeding was a lot worse than driving a few mph over the limit and being fully aware of your surroundings. Presenter scowled, but offered no opinion. He went on to annoy AA guy even more when he started talking about stopping speeds from the Highway Code being very dated for a modern car. His argument was the Top Gear episode where Clarkson proved it in some Luxo barge, presenter said it was all staged and under normal circumstances it wouldn’t happen, to which the guy replied well how did they get the actual distances for the Highway Code
Biggest issue for me (sitting quietly smiling at the back) was a real life scenario the presenter brought up. He showed a photo of typical B road in the countryside where the road broached the brow of a hill, flanked by hedges either side and displaying two road signs. First sign was a national speed limit, followed by an oncoming right turn sign. He said, a car has broached the brow of the hill, legally doing 60mph, to be surprised by another car stopped 100yds down the road waiting to turn right. Apparently the car hit the waiting car, pushing it directly into an oncoming lorry and instantly killing the stopped car driver. He then went on to ask us what we thought appropriate for the situation. Obvious answer from ourselves was to slow down before going over the brow, but Mr argumentative took it as a perfect opportunity to get a few points, by suggesting the authorities and all those involved in making the roads a safer place (aimed at AA guy) being held responsible as the national speed limit was inappropriate (I agreed with him). So, after another little tit for tat between them (he probably added an extra 20min’s to the SAC
) the AA guy came up with his default answer and had me scratching my head. He said, you should slow appropriately (agree) and if you find a car the other side waiting to turn right, stop at the brow and switch your hazard lights on, once the car has turned right proceed on your journey. Mr naughty was up in arms asking what speed was appropriate to be able to stop at the brow without having to reverse, instructor, 10mph. This led to, “surely driving at 10mph on a national speed limit road is very dangerous?” but he was having none of it. It still has me thinking today what could of avoided the collision (obviously speed), but stopping on a main national speed limit road isn’t the answertony wright said:
Mine had the obligatory guy, who argued the toss on every available occasion. The AA guy reminded him that although it was neither a pass or fail course they could still fail him
I actually thought Mr argumentative had quite a few valid arguments, specifically the 30mph, 35mph stopping topic. His argument was that glancing at your speedo every few seconds and worrying about speeding was a lot worse than driving a few mph over the limit and being fully aware of your surroundings. Presenter scowled, but offered no opinion. He went on to annoy AA guy even more when he started talking about stopping speeds from the Highway Code being very dated for a modern car. His argument was the Top Gear episode where Clarkson proved it in some Luxo barge, presenter said it was all staged and under normal circumstances it wouldn’t happen, to which the guy replied well how did they get the actual distances for the Highway Code
Biggest issue for me (sitting quietly smiling at the back) was a real life scenario the presenter brought up. He showed a photo of typical B road in the countryside where the road broached the brow of a hill, flanked by hedges either side and displaying two road signs. First sign was a national speed limit, followed by an oncoming right turn sign. He said, a car has broached the brow of the hill, legally doing 60mph, to be surprised by another car stopped 100yds down the road waiting to turn right. Apparently the car hit the waiting car, pushing it directly into an oncoming lorry and instantly killing the stopped car driver. He then went on to ask us what we thought appropriate for the situation. Obvious answer from ourselves was to slow down before going over the brow, but Mr argumentative took it as a perfect opportunity to get a few points, by suggesting the authorities and all those involved in making the roads a safer place (aimed at AA guy) being held responsible as the national speed limit was inappropriate (I agreed with him). So, after another little tit for tat between them (he probably added an extra 20min’s to the SAC) the AA guy came up with his default answer and had me scratching my head. He said, you should slow appropriately (agree) and if you find a car the other side waiting to turn right, stop at the brow and switch your hazard lights on, once the car has turned right proceed on your journey. Mr naughty was up in arms asking what speed was appropriate to be able to stop at the brow without having to reverse, instructor, 10mph. This led to, “surely driving at 10mph on a national speed limit road is very dangerous?” but he was having none of it. It still has me thinking today what could of avoided the collision (obviously speed), but stopping on a main national speed limit road isn’t the answer
You should drive at a speed that will allow you to stop or avoid a hazard as yet unseen.I actually thought Mr argumentative had quite a few valid arguments, specifically the 30mph, 35mph stopping topic. His argument was that glancing at your speedo every few seconds and worrying about speeding was a lot worse than driving a few mph over the limit and being fully aware of your surroundings. Presenter scowled, but offered no opinion. He went on to annoy AA guy even more when he started talking about stopping speeds from the Highway Code being very dated for a modern car. His argument was the Top Gear episode where Clarkson proved it in some Luxo barge, presenter said it was all staged and under normal circumstances it wouldn’t happen, to which the guy replied well how did they get the actual distances for the Highway Code
Biggest issue for me (sitting quietly smiling at the back) was a real life scenario the presenter brought up. He showed a photo of typical B road in the countryside where the road broached the brow of a hill, flanked by hedges either side and displaying two road signs. First sign was a national speed limit, followed by an oncoming right turn sign. He said, a car has broached the brow of the hill, legally doing 60mph, to be surprised by another car stopped 100yds down the road waiting to turn right. Apparently the car hit the waiting car, pushing it directly into an oncoming lorry and instantly killing the stopped car driver. He then went on to ask us what we thought appropriate for the situation. Obvious answer from ourselves was to slow down before going over the brow, but Mr argumentative took it as a perfect opportunity to get a few points, by suggesting the authorities and all those involved in making the roads a safer place (aimed at AA guy) being held responsible as the national speed limit was inappropriate (I agreed with him). So, after another little tit for tat between them (he probably added an extra 20min’s to the SAC
) the AA guy came up with his default answer and had me scratching my head. He said, you should slow appropriately (agree) and if you find a car the other side waiting to turn right, stop at the brow and switch your hazard lights on, once the car has turned right proceed on your journey. Mr naughty was up in arms asking what speed was appropriate to be able to stop at the brow without having to reverse, instructor, 10mph. This led to, “surely driving at 10mph on a national speed limit road is very dangerous?” but he was having none of it. It still has me thinking today what could of avoided the collision (obviously speed), but stopping on a main national speed limit road isn’t the answerThe NSL doesn't indicate that it is safe to do 60mph on every part of the road.
MC Bodge said:
You should drive at a speed that will allow you to stop or avoid a hazard as yet unseen.
The NSL doesn't indicate that it is safe to do 60mph on every part of the road.
Totally agree, but how do you ascertain an appropriate speed? If you were unfamiliar with the road, but aware of the sign, would you slow down enough to bring your car to a halt on the brow of the hill without the need to reverse? Doubt it, chances are you would slow appropriately and stop behind the waiting car and there lies the problem. You have now further reduced the distance whilst putting yourself in danger. So, the AA guy may have provided the only safe answer, but reality dictates it would probably never happen, unless you were local to the area.The NSL doesn't indicate that it is safe to do 60mph on every part of the road.
tony wright said:
MC Bodge said:
You should drive at a speed that will allow you to stop or avoid a hazard as yet unseen.
The NSL doesn't indicate that it is safe to do 60mph on every part of the road.
Totally agree, but how do you ascertain an appropriate speed? If you were unfamiliar with the road, but aware of the sign, would you slow down enough to bring your car to a halt on the brow of the hill without the need to reverse? Doubt it, chances are you would slow appropriately and stop behind the waiting car and there lies the problem. You have now further reduced the distance whilst putting yourself in danger. So, the AA guy may have provided the only safe answer, but reality dictates it would probably never happen, unless you were local to the area.The NSL doesn't indicate that it is safe to do 60mph on every part of the road.
yonex said:
MC Bodge said:
You may need to stop at the brow of the hill, yes. You don't know what is over the brow.
But this usually comes from making mistakes and life experience. If you were on a motorbike would you go over a blind brow at speed not knowing whether there was a stationary truck on the other side?
"Mind Driving" is an interesting read.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff