I tried but

[martine]

Nice post Nigel

[plumber]

The responses to my fright have been plentiful and add that I thank Martine, Nigell and Stephen for trying to understand the situation and provide rational advice. I take a view in life never to trust "sacred cows" (no offense intended to anyone or thing) When we unquestionably accept a practice/technique/situation. This to me is the essence of being a thinking driver. Like a number here I am an iAM observer and any technique I introduce an associate to I myself must believe, understand and have honest conviction to it. I have read all the BGOL threads cited previously but after my little incident and reflecting on the contributions here I am convinced that flexibility is key and Full Seperation would seem to be dogma carried over from the ages of cable brakes/clutches and double declutching

[ScoobyChris]

Like a number here I am an iAM observer and any technique I introduce an associate to I myself must believe, understand and have honest conviction to it.

I think as a coach it's important to allow an associate to explore all the techniques for themselves and decide which they like and when they might use it. Just because I believe a technique is best, doesn't mean it is

Chris

[Gareth]

after my little incident and reflecting on the contributions here I am convinced that flexibility is key and Full Seperation would seem to be dogma carried over from the ages of cable brakes/clutches and double declutching

I'll be interested to know your opinion after you've mastered the technique.

[plumber]

Excuse me Gareth but you do not know me and looking back it appears you advocated a new system whereby the gear decision was made before braking. lliked yor rambling display I would expect you turning into a 30 side road from an NSL would be spectaculr as you would presumaby changed from 6th to 2nd at 70 to get your so called flexible ger before the junction!!!

I cannot take any lesson from you following such arrogant and unhelpful contribution

[Hanna]

Actually Gareth is correct .. though he could've put it more politely.

It's a matter of observation and planning .. One set of braking .. one gear change .. initially you would be better off doing it on quiter roads then as your compentency increases then you can practise on the quicker roads such as nsl. People often dismiss techniques because they try too hard and eventually give up. Everybody is different .. some pickup easy etc. If you have difficulty do not force learning on roads where you are likely to be influenced or worried by hazzards or other drivers.

I'm not very good at explaining sometimes but hope that is simplistic enough

Gareth .. don't be a Poophead,

[waremark]

Excuse me Gareth but you do not know me and looking back it appears you advocated a new system whereby the gear decision was made before braking. lliked yor rambling display I would expect you turning into a 30 side road from an NSL would be spectaculr as you would presumaby changed from 6th to 2nd at 70 to get your so called flexible ger before the junction!!!

I cannot take any lesson from you following such arrogant and unhelpful contribution

Your understanding of what Gareth wrote is rather different from mine.

[Gareth]

I would expect you turning into a 30 side road from an NSL

This wasn't the situation you described. According to Google Maps Streetview the A57 through Rainhill has a 30 mph limit. Along this road I would be using a combination of 2nd and 3rd gear in our car with the diesel engine. In the ebb and flow of driving I would change to 2nd gear if I had lifted off for hazards and dropped below about 28 mph, returning to 3rd as the hazard density decreased and when I had increased my speed to 30 mph.

In our car with the petrol engine, I would probably be using mostly 3rd and dipping into 4th for the least hazardous, straight and flat sections, or 2nd for sections of higher hazard density.

The point about being in flexible gear is two-fold - that's what you should be doing anyway, (although great observation and forward planning may mean you can use a gear that provides no flexibility for part of the time), and that especially in cars with diesel engines you don't want to be braking such that the engine speed at the end of braking is much below the idle speed.

Not being in a flexible gear is one of the triggers for partial separation, where the clutch is depressed while braking, to stop the engine juddering as the engine speed is forced below the idle speed.

For the turning -- I don't know which one in Rainhill as there in one good match for your description, (Kingsdale Avenue), and two others where the side-roads are slightly offset to each other -- in our car with the diesel engine I would probably take the turning in 1st gear having braked while in 2nd or 3rd, then DDC'd to 1st on the move. In our other car, it'd almost certainly be 2nd gear for the turning having braked in 3rd or 4th.

you would presumaby changed from 6th to 2nd at 70 to get your so called flexible ger before the junction!!!

On a dual-carriageway NSL with a turn into a 30 mph side road, I'd probably find on approach that the turning doesn't have such a sharp radius.

In our car with the diesel engine I would have lifted off well in advance to let the speed in 6th gear fall from 70 mph, indicating at the same time to help following traffic understand why I am slowing, and somewhere above 50 mph I would have changed from the cruising gear to 4th, being an appropriate flexible gear for that speed. This will allow me to brake to about to about 20 mph with complete separation, then allowing me to DDC into 2nd gear for the turning.

If I wanted to do it with partial separation, I would brake in 6th gear at 70 mph, depressing the clutch when the speed fell to about 40 mph, wait for braking to complete then rev-match into 2nd gear for the turning.

I cannot take any lesson from you following such arrogant and unhelpful contribution

My point was simple; you are writing off a technique just because you haven't been able to master it.

[trashbat]

I felt like this with regard to BGOL a lot during the IAM course. This is part of the oft-described lull during the same, where you think, 'these techniques are making my driving worse, and I can't see what it's giving me'. It took third party observation to rid me of my rationalisations for my half hearted attempts at it, and now I can look back and say it has improved things.

I have to say I agree with this:

BGOL, who needs BGOL! The salient point from the OP was "I planned to brake to around 2nd gear and get off the brake by the start of the mouth of the right turn". In essence, that was too late and he should have already been in the correct gear by that time - earlier actions would have allowed additional time for the other driver to have accomplished his manoeuvre without causing any grief.


Ex Senior Obs
now Training Officer and Tutor

[Standard Dave]

Like a number here I am an iAM observer and any technique I introduce an associate to I myself must believe, understand and have honest conviction to it.

I think as a coach it's important to allow an associate to explore all the techniques for themselves and decide which they like and when they might use it. Just because I believe a technique is best, doesn't mean it is

Chris

Also the basis of inclusive learning and assessment, there are many different learning and teaching styles as a trainer you have to find styles that suit you but also suit the learning styles of your students.



As I said earlier in this thread some of the techniques lose there meaning at the lower speeds of civilian advanced driving compared to reponse driving, racing techniques or other high speed driving.

The seperation is there for safety and the overlap suggests a lack of planning and leaving no marging for the unexpected or mechanical fault each and every deviation from the system should be justified and then if there is a justification for a deviation or substitution of techniques it is fine as long as safety and to a lesser extent smoothness are not compromised.

[jcochrane]

The seperation is there for safety and the overlap suggests a lack of planning and leaving no marging for the unexpected or mechanical fault each and every deviation from the system should be justified and then if there is a justification for a deviation or substitution of techniques it is fine as long as safety and to a lesser extent smoothness are not compromised.

In my mischievous mode.
Would it then be logical, from a safety point of view, to be even better to heel n toe? With the foot on the brake during the gear change phase if an emergency occurs fractions of a second can be saved and the stopping distance shortened.

[7db]

The genius of HnT is not that it allows you to avoid separation or to multitask, but that it allows you to select final entry speed after all the information is in and ready to go. Provided the gear selection is obvious enough prior to that, it seems sensible to me.

[Stephen]

I would have thought that if an emergency arose,then it was developing as you approach and it should have been planned in your information phase,no,then you can apply the system of car control.

[jcochrane]

If only all emergencies could be planned for. We do our best to anticipate the "what ifs".

[Stephen]

They can but if you dont avoid it then you have not planned well enough