Advanced Driver Training

[Eddie Hitler]

[Red Bill]

Motorcyclists are in NO position to be critical of any other road user: it is rare to see one not either riding dangerously, or blatantly breaking the speed limit.

 

Considering the undoubted vulnerability of anyone on two wheels, they have a cheek commenting on drivers when a significant proportion of them have no respect for anything in the highway code.

 

High time the coppers started coming down hard on these hooligans of the road.

 

Harsh, but fair.

 

Naughty 

 

And why do they have to ride with headlight on full beam thus dazzling on-coming traffic.

[TRL]

[RedRock]

And why do they have to ride with headlight on full beam thus dazzling on-coming traffic.

Reading this thread makes me think some of you would pick a fight with a paper bag!

So ..... if we ban motorcyclists from the road let's add - in order of danger to other road users:-

Women Drivers (all)

Old Wrinklies

Anyone under 25

Lycra clad men cyclists

Anyone towing a caravan

Motor home drivers (all)

Anyone towing a horse box

BMW drivers (all)

[TRL]

Reading this thread makes me think some of you would pick a fight with a paper bag!

So ..... if we ban motorcyclists from the road let's add - in order of danger to other road users:-

Women Drivers (all)

Old Wrinklies

Anyone under 25

Lycra clad men cyclists

Anyone towing a caravan

Motor home drivers (all)

Anyone towing a horse box

BMW drivers (all)

In that case can we add people that are allowed on the road.

 

Nice looking Lycra clad ladies

 

 

erm, I can't think of anything else, it would also help keep speeds down better than speed bumps.

[Pickle Rick]

[martine]

Hi Guys - sorry about the thread resurrection!  I found this discussion as it comes up on page 2 if you google 'advanced driving bristol'!

I'm an advanced instructor and if anyone's interested why we teach to not to go down through the gears when slowing, I'd be happy to explain.

[...]

Another great thread .............

Advanced Driver Training? Phone up Bristol IAM and book some. If you like it, take a course and then have a go at the Advanced Test.

One thing they will teach you is defensive driving: everyone else is a ******** moron, so chill and just protect yourself.

We don't need* to go to war over it.

47 minutes ago, martine said:

Hi Guys - sorry about the thread resurrection!  I found this discussion as it comes up on page 2 if you google 'advanced driving bristol'!

I'm an advanced instructor and if anyone's interested why we teach to not to go down through the gears when slowing, I'd be happy to explain.

Is it because cars have 'brakes'?

Is it??

 

Uncle TFR

 

* Except motorcyclists, whose behaviour is beyond redemption.

[martine]

9 minutes ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

Another great thread .............

Advanced Driver Training? Phone up Bristol IAM and book some. If you like it, take a course and then have a go at the Advanced Test.

One thing they will teach you is defensive driving: everyone else is a ******** moron, so chill and just protect yourself.

We don't need* to go to war over it.

Is it because cars have 'brakes'?

Is it??

 

Uncle TFR

 

* Except motorcyclists, whose behaviour is beyond redemption.

I'm guessing you have done an IAM course Uncle TFR?  If so, excellent - I wish more people would continue to learn new techniques rather than think passing the DVSA L-test at 17 or 18 will see them through for the next 50 years.

[...]

54 minutes ago, martine said:

I'm guessing you have done an IAM course Uncle TFR?  If so, excellent - I wish more people would continue to learn new techniques rather than think passing the DVSA L-test at 17 or 18 will see them through for the next 50 years.

I cannot confirm, or deny this, as it would go 0.01% of the way to identifying me on what is an anonymous forum.

Neither will I be publishing my tax return on here, although admittedly you have not called for this directly.

More people probably should attempt the advanced course, but, of course, they may be afraid of failure.

The majority of drivers think they are good or above average. There seems to be much 'talking the talk' and not enough 'walking the walk'.

Uncle TFR

P.S. There is also an Advanced Test for bikers: not much evidence of that on the roads, the dangerous death-wish monkeys .

[martine]

So why the secrecy?  I'm happy to stand by everything I say on internet forums and I subscribe to a quite a few.

Not sure what you've got against bikers...there are good and bad just like every group of road users...that includes bus drivers, taxi drivers, BMW drivers, cyclists etc.

I'd like to see a compulsory driving assessment every 10 years when you renew your photocard.  It could start off as just an hour or 2 with a suitably qualified instructor and only if they considered the driver outright dangerous, would it be reported to the DVSA.  If it was done properly, I reckon most drivers would gain so much, they'd be happy - bit like most driver's reaction having attended a speed awareness course.  More a case of sharing modern tips/techniques and keeping the driver safe and their licence clean.

[...]

11 minutes ago, martine said:

So why the secrecy?  I'm happy to stand by everything I say on internet forums and I subscribe to a quite a few.

Not sure what you've got against bikers...there are good and bad just like every group of road users...that includes bus drivers, taxi drivers, BMW drivers, cyclists etc.

I'd like to see a compulsory driving assessment every 10 years when you renew your photocard.  It could start off as just an hour or 2 with a suitably qualified instructor and only if they considered the driver outright dangerous, would it be reported to the DVSA.  If it was done properly, I reckon most drivers would gain so much, they'd be happy - bit like most driver's reaction having attended a speed awareness course.  More a case of sharing modern tips/techniques and keeping the driver safe and their licence clean.

I accept that there is - in all probability - at least one safe, sensible motorcyclist on UK roads.

It's just that every motorcyclist with a bike with sufficient power, breaks the speed limit; crosses solid white lines; rides over chevrons; undertakes in traffic. They are shocking at giving the signals required by the highway code.

DO NOT get me started on taxi drivers ...........

 

Uncle TFR

[martine]

Methinks you exaggerate somewhat...I see plenty of good bikers - perhaps it's the bad ones you remember.

[RedRock]

5 hours ago, martine said:

Hi Guys - sorry about the thread resurrection!  I found this discussion as it comes up on page 2 if you google 'advanced driving bristol'!

I'm an advanced instructor and if anyone's interested why we teach to not to go down through the gears when slowing, I'd be happy to explain.

Yes please.

We had an advance driver training course for work once. We asked the instructeress to explain and she just said that's what the police are taught. Have you read how many crashes they have!

It really does seem like the emperor's clothes story. Some prat thought it was a good idea and nobody questioned the logic of it. I'm not saying crash through the gears to slow down but you've got to be in the correct gear to respond to an emergency - basic commonsense. A split second fumble around with your gearstick (and you shouldn't be doing that anyhow whilst your driving :-)) can mean life or death to a child running out in the road. 

Do you realise you could be a Very Advanced Driving Instructor if you adopted the commonsense approach? Think; books, videos and a personal mention in a revised Highway Code. The world could be your lobster. 

[martine]

OK - I'll do my best to explain the thinking.

The idea of going down through the gears when slowing is a hangover from very old cars where the brakes were rubbish and you had to use engine braking as well.

Modern cars (anything in the last 20+ years) have excellent brakes.  The modern technique is to ease off the accelerator in plenty of time (no point in rushing up to say a red light), then use smooth braking to reduce speed to what ever is needed for the 'hazard' (it might be a complete stop or it might be going from 60mph to 30 for a bend on a country road).

Once you're at the correct speed, you then select the appropriate gear - so you might be changing from 5th to 3rd for example.  It you're coming to a stop then leave the gear stick alone until you're stopped - then select neutral or 1st if you think the red light is going to change very soon.

By using brakes to slow (and leaving the gears alone)

• you are slowing using all 4 wheels i.e. much less chance of skidding if it's slippery
• the ABS will help if needed (it can't if you're using gears to slow)
• less one-handed steering
• less work for the driver (all that clutch down, select new gear, clutch up, clutch down, select new gear...etc)
• the car is more stable (brakes normally put around 60% of the braking force on the front and 40% on rear - you can't do this if using engine braking)
• most drivers can use finer control of the brakes to slow than using gears - making it smooth
• less wear and tear on the clutch and gear selector
• better fuel consumption...yes you read that right

Missing out gears is called 'block changing' and is a great way to be smooth and progressive.  Learner are taught this now (I wasn't - too old!) and all emergency services drivers use it as well.

There are exceptions but for 95% of vehicles and driving situations it's a great technique.

Sorry about the length of the post.

Questions?

[RedRock]

59 minutes ago, martine said:

 

Thanks. For clarity, are you saying that if you are coming to a stop then you don't touch the gears? 

If so, you could be travelling at 20mph in sixth gear? A scenario.  You need to take evasive action and speed around a cyclist who falls off his bike immediately in front of you. You can't, as you're in a wrong gear. At best, you stall. At worst, lose control and run him/her down. 

Surely, the basic rule of driving is that you have always got to be in full control of your vehicle. If you are in the wrong gear you are not. 

[martine]

19 minutes ago, Moor2Sea said:

Thanks. For clarity, are you saying that if you are coming to a stop then you don't touch the gears?

If so, you could be travelling at 20mph in sixth gear? A scenario.  You need to take evasive action and speed around a cyclist who falls off his bike immediately in front of you. You can't, as you're in a wrong gear. At best, you stall. At worst, lose control and run him/her down.

Surely, the basic rule of driving is that you have always got to be in full control of your vehicle. If you are in the wrong gear you are not.

Yes I'm saying don't touch the gears - so yes you could be in 6th at 20mph.

Tell me something...how many times have you had to accelerate out of trouble in the last 5 years?  In my experience it's extremely rare - I can only think of one instance which was where a vehicle on a slip road joining with me in lane 1 - he hadn't seen me and I chose to accelerate out of his way rather then get side-swiped.

In your example - I'm not sure how accelerating past a fallen cyclist would be a good thing to do (rather then brake hard and swerve) but perhaps I'm not understanding your scenario.

Think of all the extra gear changes you do and all the one-handed steering...for that very, very rare occurrence...

[Lanterne Rouge]

In this, admittedly unlikely event, I`d be interested to hear the insurance industry`s view (apart from the standard default of trying to weasel out of the claim obviously)

[RedRock]

3 hours ago, martine said:

Yes I'm saying don't touch the gears - so yes you could be in 6th at 20mph.

Tell me something...how many times have you had to accelerate out of trouble in the last 5 years?  In my experience it's extremely rare - I can only think of one instance which was where a vehicle on a slip road joining with me in lane 1 - he hadn't seen me and I chose to accelerate out of his way rather then get side-swiped.

In your example - I'm not sure how accelerating past a fallen cyclist would be a good thing to do (rather then brake hard and swerve) but perhaps I'm not understanding your scenario.

Think of all the extra gear changes you do and all the one-handed steering...for that very, very rare occurrence...

Once.

A cyclist, coming towards me, turning right came to the head of a stationary queue and couldn't get his feet out of his clip-ones. Fell, like a stone, directly in front of my offside front wheel as I was slowing down to join the back of a line of traffic. He fell less than 1 foot in front of me. If I hadn't been a cyclist myself and saw his problem, and been in the right gear to take action to swerve around him, his head would have been squashed under my tyre.

Could have braked and clutched, but risk of loss of control (skid and/or stall) and in the split second I had, it was a swerve and drive round (in full control) reaction. 

So, yes. Just based on my experience that's only once, but one life saved.

Think the cyclist would vouch for the correct gear approach if he were to be asked!

Seriously, I just can't believe people are now taught not to be in full control of a vehicle at all times. May be I'm old school but utter madness in my opinion. Hopefully, just a fad and commonsense will eventually prevail. 

[Welcome To The Jungle]

5 hours ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

I accept that there is - in all probability - at least one safe, sensible motorcyclist on UK roads.

It's just that every motorcyclist with a bike with sufficient power, breaks the speed limit; crosses solid white lines; rides over chevrons; undertakes in traffic. They are shocking at giving the signals required by the highway code.

DO NOT get me started on taxi drivers ...........

 

Uncle TFR

Yeah but we get everywhere faster and I'm always smiling on my commute through traffic  

Yours

A Dangerous Death Wish Monkey

[Welcome To The Jungle]

19 minutes ago, Moor2Sea said:

Once.

A cyclist, coming towards me, turning right came to the head of a stationary queue and couldn't get his feet out of his clip-ones. Fell, like a stone, directly in front of my offside front wheel as I was slowing down to join the back of a line of traffic. He fell less than 1 foot in front of me. If I hadn't been a cyclist myself and saw his problem, and been in the right gear to take action to swerve around him, his head would have been squashed under my tyre.

Could have braked and clutched, but risk of loss of control (skid and/or stall) and in the split second I had, it was a swerve and drive round (in full control) reaction. 

So, yes. Just based on my experience that's only once, but one life saved.

Think the cyclist would vouch for the correct gear approach if he were to be asked!

Seriously, I just can't believe people are now taught not to be in full control of a vehicle at all times. May be I'm old school but utter madness in my opinion. Hopefully, just a fad and commonsense will eventually prevail. 

Surely though you could still have avoided him by turning the wheel? Any kind of acceleration would have taken you closer to him in a shorter space of time, increasing collision speed and making you turn later. Forgive me if I have this wrong.

As a biker (hello again Uncle TFR), engine braking affects only the back wheel when it is the front wheel that has the greater stopping power. I try not to engine break too much, especially down hill. However once the correct gear has been found, I cannot abide people who use their breaks to maintain a constant speed. 

[martine]

16 hours ago, Red Right Hand said:

In this, admittedly unlikely event, I`d be interested to hear the insurance industry`s view (apart from the standard default of trying to weasel out of the claim obviously)

There wouldn't be an issue - you are more likely to be able to avoid a collision if you are using brakes, keeping both hands on the wheel than faffing around changing gear when there is no need.  Like I said, it's been the recommended technique for at least 15 year (for learners) and for much longer for advanced drivers.

[martine]

13 hours ago, Moor2Sea said:

Once.

A cyclist, coming towards me, turning right came to the head of a stationary queue and couldn't get his feet out of his clip-ones. Fell, like a stone, directly in front of my offside front wheel as I was slowing down to join the back of a line of traffic. He fell less than 1 foot in front of me. If I hadn't been a cyclist myself and saw his problem, and been in the right gear to take action to swerve around him, his head would have been squashed under my tyre.

Could have braked and clutched, but risk of loss of control (skid and/or stall) and in the split second I had, it was a swerve and drive round (in full control) reaction.

So, yes. Just based on my experience that's only once, but one life saved.

Think the cyclist would vouch for the correct gear approach if he were to be asked!

Seriously, I just can't believe people are now taught not to be in full control of a vehicle at all times. May be I'm old school but utter madness in my opinion. Hopefully, just a fad and commonsense will eventually prevail.

I still don't understand how accelerating towards the stricken cyclist '1 foot in front of me' helps.  Brake hard and steer towards the nearside would be better - but I wasn't there so I'll bow to your judgement at the time.

I listed many reasons earlier why most experts in road driving consider using the brakes to slow (and not engine braking) is a better, more modern, safer and MORE CONTROLLED technique - but you seem to be ignoring all those and are stuck on the need to be able to accelerate out of trouble.  I could quote lots of people and books and websites backing up the arguments - but I get the feeling you no matter what I or anyone else says, you are confident in your own ability and judgement....so I guess I'll leave it there.