Rowley010 wrote:Based in Lancashire, near Burnley
Rowley010 wrote: but in particularly she said you COULD NOT notice a gear change they were all that smooth. Will doing the IAM teach me to change gear and drive smooth like this? This is something, among other things that I would really like to get out of it
Horse wrote:Rowley010 wrote: but in particularly she said you COULD NOT notice a gear change they were all that smooth. Will doing the IAM teach me to change gear and drive smooth like this? This is something, among other things that I would really like to get out of it
DIY
Find a quiet straight road, practise going up and down the gears while keeping the car at a constant speed: 3 - 4 - 5 - 4 - 3 etc.
Beforehand, notice from the rev counter (if you have one) and the engine's noise and vibration, how the revs are higher for the lower gear at the same speed. You'll need to match those rev changes as you re-engage the clutch.
Give yourself a 'mark' out of 10 for each gear change, and try to feel where any 'jolts' are and what causes them, then work to eliminate them.
StressedDave wrote:petes wrote:Having done both at different times, my advice with the benefit of hindsight would be to get in contact with a regular driving instructor, and ask him/her to provide you with a series of lessons, geared up towards an advanced level of driving.
I'd be inclined to select one who actually works in the field of advanced driving myself. As many here will attest, many instructors do RoSPA/IAM in order to get their skills up to an acceptable level. DVSA Part II is the same as the standard test, with the only changes being motorway (if they can find one), doing all the manoeuvres and having a more stringent pass regime.
martine wrote:petes wrote:StressedDave wrote:DVSA Part II is the same as the standard test, with the only changes being motorway (if they can find one), doing all the manoeuvres and having a more stringent pass regime.
That's a fair point. My suggestion would perhaps work well for someone wishing to just sharpen up their driving, to counteract any bad habits that creep in since passing the basic test, rather than develop a new driving style based on IPSGA, etc...
Quite agree with Stressed Dave - the ADI Part 2 test is not what I would call advanced.
StressedDave wrote:DVSA Part II is the same as the standard test, with the only changes being motorway (if they can find one), doing all the manoeuvres and having a more stringent pass regime.
RobC wrote:martine wrote:petes wrote:
That's a fair point. My suggestion would perhaps work well for someone wishing to just sharpen up their driving, to counteract any bad habits that creep in since passing the basic test, rather than develop a new driving style based on IPSGA, etc...
Quite agree with Stressed Dave - the ADI Part 2 test is not what I would call advanced.
Martin, Id be interested to know why you don't consider DVSA Pt 2 to be an advanced test. The DVSA call it an advanced test, it requires a difficult theory test to be taken before it can be taken which 50% of candidates fail and the Pt 2 test has a 50% pass rate. The same cannot be said of IAM where there is a minimal theory requirement and a high pass rate of 90%.
StressedDave wrote:Garrison wrote:Being able to drive at an advanced level is different from being able to teach at an advanced level.
I do not know anything about DVSA part 1 or 2 for an Advanced Driving Instructor. However, given the percentage of time an ADI will sit in the passenger seat vs. the driver seat ( maybe 90% vs. 10% with the student in the car ), my logic leads me to think that the emphasis should be placed on teaching/instructing rather than being able to demonstrate an advanced drive.
Is that correct?
DVSA parts 1 & 2 use exactly the same syllabus as the standard driving test. There is no part 1/2 for an Advanced Driving Instructor, only an Approved Driving Instructor. The only differences between the parts 1 & 2 and their novice equivalent is:
a) a more vigorous pass mark
b) a longer practical test duration with all the possible manoeuvres built in.
As an analogy, gaining parts 1 & 2 mean the equivalent of an A* GCSE; it's not the same as having an A-level in the subject.
RobC wrote:Martin, Id be interested to know why you don't consider DVSA Pt 2 to be an advanced test. The DVSA call it an advanced test, it requires a difficult theory test to be taken before it can be taken which 50% of candidates fail and the Pt 2 test has a 50% pass rate. The same cannot be said of IAM where there is a minimal theory requirement and a high pass rate of 90%.
martine wrote:RobC wrote:Martin, Id be interested to know why you don't consider DVSA Pt 2 to be an advanced test. The DVSA call it an advanced test, it requires a difficult theory test to be taken before it can be taken which 50% of candidates fail and the Pt 2 test has a 50% pass rate. The same cannot be said of IAM where there is a minimal theory requirement and a high pass rate of 90%.
You make a fair point about the theory test but P2 doesn't demand any different skills or techniques to what an excellent learner would do. Advanced driving to me is about greatly extended observation, anticipation, super-smoothness, positioning differently and maximum safe progress.
I think you need to be careful in generalising all ADI's as full-time professionals (I'm not) who are great drivers and all IAM/ROSPA observers as being poor counterparts. I've driven with poor ADI's and some outstanding Observers.
Lastly, your reference to 'ROSPA being more valued'...if you are an IAM Observer you get retested every 3 years under the IMI accreditation scheme.
martine wrote:RobC wrote:Martin, Id be interested to know why you don't consider DVSA Pt 2 to be an advanced test. The DVSA call it an advanced test, it requires a difficult theory test to be taken before it can be taken which 50% of candidates fail and the Pt 2 test has a 50% pass rate. The same cannot be said of IAM where there is a minimal theory requirement and a high pass rate of 90%.
You make a fair point about the theory test but P2 doesn't demand any different skills or techniques to what an excellent learner would do. Advanced driving to me is about greatly extended observation, anticipation, super-smoothness, positioning differently and maximum safe progress.
I think you need to be careful in generalising all ADI's as full-time professionals (I'm not) who are great drivers and all IAM/ROSPA observers as being poor counterparts. I've driven with poor ADI's and some outstanding Observers.
Lastly, your reference to 'ROSPA being more valued'...if you are an IAM Observer you get retested every 3 years under the IMI accreditation scheme.
akirk wrote:martine wrote:RobC wrote:Martin, Id be interested to know why you don't consider DVSA Pt 2 to be an advanced test. The DVSA call it an advanced test, it requires a difficult theory test to be taken before it can be taken which 50% of candidates fail and the Pt 2 test has a 50% pass rate. The same cannot be said of IAM where there is a minimal theory requirement and a high pass rate of 90%.
You make a fair point about the theory test but P2 doesn't demand any different skills or techniques to what an excellent learner would do. Advanced driving to me is about greatly extended observation, anticipation, super-smoothness, positioning differently and maximum safe progress.
I think you need to be careful in generalising all ADI's as full-time professionals (I'm not) who are great drivers and all IAM/ROSPA observers as being poor counterparts. I've driven with poor ADI's and some outstanding Observers.
Lastly, your reference to 'ROSPA being more valued'...if you are an IAM Observer you get retested every 3 years under the IMI accreditation scheme.
The other perspective on the theory test though is that there is little value in theory known but not used...
A theory test allows a driver to show a lot of theoretical knowledge
An AD test would expect to see that theory in place through the driving...
the standard driving test (or PT2 test) examine theory at a theoretical level precisely because the driven test is not examining the driver to so high a level... why would an AD test need to ask questions in a theoretical environment when the expectation is to see that same knowledge deployed in the driving?
there is no value in theoretical knowledge without the ability to use it
Alasdair
Return to Advanced Driving Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests