IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Anything that doesn't fit elsewhere - doesn't have to be AD related.
User avatar
Strangely Brown
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 8:06 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Strangely Brown » Fri Apr 29, 2022 6:53 am

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Image

Post training perceived ability often exceeds actual ability. This has always been true and is something that the student needs to understand.

During one course my trainer put me though a series of exercises, gradually increasing speed and complexity. It was great. I was getting better and better. Then I reached the limit of my ability and control of the car was no longer mine [*].
At that point the trainer ended the exercise and said that he always like to finish on a loss of control. Just to make the point.

After the IAM test I spent many years in the "I am an expert" phase. Only now do I see how wrong I was.

* No it was not on the road. It was on an airfield.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Horse » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:10 am

Over-confidence after training won't have been helped by sentiments along the lines of "driving to the system means you cannot crash."
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

vanman
Posts: 402
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:16 pm
Location: Caterham Surrey

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby vanman » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:49 am

Horse wrote: "driving to the system means you cannot crash."

Where on earth did you get that from?

User avatar
jont-
Posts: 1522
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Herefordshire

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby jont- » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:58 am

Horse wrote:Over-confidence after training won't have been helped by sentiments along the lines of "driving to the system means you cannot crash."

And yet there's a similar straw man trotted about about autonomous cars (do you kill the driver or the pedestrian). If you get to that point, you've got something more basic wrong at an earlier stage.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Horse » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:52 am

vanman wrote:
Horse wrote: "driving to the system means you cannot crash."

Where on earth did you get that from?


I think it was John Miles (Hendon instructor) in his book 'Expert Driving the Police Way'.

Certainly when I started learning this stuff (1980s) there were similar statements being made, allegedly including trafpols who crashed having to admit that they had not been driving to the System.

Similar sentiment here, 1:00 on.

Last edited by Horse on Fri Apr 29, 2022 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Horse » Fri Apr 29, 2022 11:04 am

"The system makes it impossible for anyone to have and accident [crash]" John Miles, 1975

Mentioned here:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/top ... 4460&i=220
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

crr003
Posts: 951
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:32 pm

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby crr003 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 2:38 pm

Horse wrote:
crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:And roads of the 1980s are not what they used to be either.

Have people changed? Eyesight and reflexes etc won't have evolved in 40 years.

So what are you saying? Reduce speed limits!
Those europeans have faster motorway limits; you don't hear them complaining.


Blimey, you managed to extrapolate a lot from a few words.

Thank you!

Horse wrote:Let's take roads. Vast improvements, particularly in terms of things like the strength of barriers.

Back in my HA days our poor amount of motorway barriers was a reason given for not increasing limits I recall. Not enough barriers on the hard shoulder (those were the days) to stop errant motorists finding the tree lined scenery.

Horse wrote:However, there's been a massive increase in traffic along with a dramatic increase in development alongside roads and, subsequently, decreased speed limits and far more double white line systems.

My experience is only of central South England. One example of a road I've used regularly over the last 40 years, the A30 from Hook to Basingstoke.

It was 30 to National, 5 or 6 miles, to 30.
Now 30 40 50 60 National 40 National 30.


What's the average speed - I'll guess 40 everywhere!
It would be interesting to relate these speed limit changes to actual RTC KSIs, or will the council claim "air quality" for wasting all that money on signage!

Horse wrote:It doesn't matter how much better cars are (and the drivers' capabilities have effectively remained unchanged, unless you know otherwise), the opportunities to use those improvements is more limited.

For drivers' capabilities, eyesight hasn't improved in 40 years, neither have reactions. Arguably, there are more distractions away from the driving task now, and some argue that lower speed limits can result in reduced concentration on driving. It could also be argued that increased numbers of road users, more signs and markings, etc., etc., mean that drivers have 'busier' more cluttered, environments to drive in.

You paint a gloomy picture - thank god those self driving cars will be able to make sense of it all! Something to look forward to.

Horse wrote:Since the UK is supposed to have the second safest roads in Europe, what safety lessons can we learn about motorways? Higher speeds might not 'cause' more crashes, but they are likely to affect the outcomes.

It sounds right to say speed makes bigger nastier collisions, but maybe involves fewer bodies? I wonder what the data say. In my limited experience the nastier crashes involved stuff running into stationary stuff because the driver was distracted - and 56 limited LGVs caused carnage. I would guess autonomous emergency braking would help some. My concern with Intelligent Speed Adaptation/Assist is that "drivers" will just have their foot to the floor and expect the vehicle to sort it out; "foggy? not to worry, shirley my car won't allow me to drive too fast......"
Although some good news with global warming - I don't see fog like I used to in the good old days.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Horse » Fri Apr 29, 2022 9:27 pm

crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:Blimey, you managed to extrapolate a lot from a few words.

Thank you!


Ah, you extrapolated it as a compliment? ;)

crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:My experience is only of central South England. One example of a road I've used regularly over the last 40 years, the A30 from Hook to Basingstoke.

It was 30 to National, 5 or 6 miles, to 30.
Now 30 40 50 60 National 40 National 30.


What's the average speed - I'll guess 40 everywhere!
It would be interesting to relate these speed limit changes to actual RTC KSIs


Well, I don't toddle everywhere at 40.

Some of the changes are almost certainly due to the massive amount of development that has gone on in the area, with consequent increase in local traffic.

That said, one part of '60' is along a dual carriageway. The two halves are widely-spaced. There used to be a lovely line of trees down the centre. Unfortunately, they were chopped down after a police car collided with one.

crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:It doesn't matter how much better cars are (and the drivers' capabilities have effectively remained unchanged ... mean that drivers have 'busier' more cluttered, environments to drive in.

You paint a gloomy picture


Not wrong :(

crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:Higher speeds might not 'cause' more crashes, but they are likely to affect the outcomes.

It sounds right to say speed makes bigger nastier collisions, but maybe involves fewer bodies?


Bit of an irony that building cars stronger (Higher 'waist' line, thicker pillars) might make crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists more likely.
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

User avatar
jcochrane
Posts: 627
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:53 pm
Location: Surrey-Kent borders and wherever good driving roads are.

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby jcochrane » Sat Apr 30, 2022 5:53 pm

vanman wrote:
Horse wrote: "driving to the system means you cannot crash."

Where on earth did you get that from?

I think that should read driving to the system means you won't have an accident of your own making. Your position, speed and gear can be correct but if someone wants to hit you they probably will.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: IAM Roadsmart’s car crash on social media

Postby Horse » Sun May 01, 2022 8:58 am

jcochrane wrote:
vanman wrote:
Horse wrote: "driving to the system means you cannot crash."

Where on earth did you get that from?

I think that should read driving to the system means you won't have an accident of your own making. Your position, speed and gear can be correct but if someone wants to hit you they probably will.


I think you're right.

Unfortunately, the actual training has supported the - almost impossible - idea and belief of perfection and so invulnerability. Again, from that era, how often did you hear "best in the World" for UK police training.

Here's an example plucked from the Internet:

" ... trained in advanced driving at Hendon Police Driving School, the best driving school in the World".

Another:

"All Our Assessors Are Retired Police Class One Drivers, All Have Received Advanced-defensive Driver Training By Some Of The Best In The World."

One more:

"trained at the famous Hendon police driving school which has an unrivalled reputation as the best police driving school in the world."

Even if those quotes may reflect the views of retired police drivers, it's views that persist and percolate through driver and rider training.
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.


Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests