Critical Analysis

[waremark]

There is far too much agreement over the fundamentals here, and as a result we are discussing minutiae. That's because we have all learned advanced driving in the same school. What about the bigger questions?

There are great drivers out there who routinely make sequential downchanges while overlapping using H & T, and continue braking into the hazard. This permits a higher entry speed with safety; if you are already braking and a reason appears which requires more braking you can stop in a shorter distance than if you have to move your right foot from the accelerator to the brake, and then move the weight of the car forward before applying maximum braking. There are great drivers who believe that you should always signal unless it would mislead. There are great drivers who use the lights to show that they are yielding priority - and have checked that they are not leading another road user into danger. And there are even more great drivers who positively reject push/pull steering.

The Roadcraft system was designed to be readily teachable to people who don't need exceptional ability or enthusiasm, to enable them to make good but not maximum progress with reasonable safety, and to work consistently under pressure in the widest variety of circumstances. Those are the criteria against which I suggest that it should be judged.

[Gareth]

If people think that any one system is 'perfect' and beyond critique they are not likely to deviate from it and apply a very rigid dogmatic style of teaching that offers no flexibility.

I'm not sure that follows for a couple of reasons. First, as kfae8959 has pointed out, Roadcraft contains little more than an ordered sequence of steps to consider when a hazard has been identified, and second that the aim of the System is to get drivers to fully prepare for a hazard before they reach it.

Anything else, such as your opening suggesting of trail braking, either complicates the steps by running more than one in parallel, and/or results in preparation being completed closer to or even at the point of the hazard.

[daz6215]

quote]
I'm not sure that follows for a couple of reasons. First, as kfae8959 has pointed out, Roadcraft contains little more than an ordered sequence of steps to consider when a hazard has been identified, and second that the aim of the System is to get drivers to fully prepare for a hazard before they reach it.

Anything else, such as your opening suggesting of trail braking, either complicates the steps by running more than one in parallel, and/or results in preparation being completed closer to or even at the point of the hazard.

So is it not possible to critique Roadcraft?

[kfae8959]

So is it not possible to critique Roadcraft?

It seems I'd misunderstood the scope of your question, thinking it was limited to the System - I believe there's another thread around here somewhere asking about that - and I stand by my point that the System is so basic as to be beyond adjustment. But I now note that you did, in fact, frame the question in terms of techniques.

My favourite analogy when teaching the techniques advocated in Roadcraft is a musical one: every pianist has to master playing scales and arpeggios; the skill that enables great pianists to extemporize, to transpose, to harmonize, and to make atonality work, is acquired by first mastering those scales...

David

[Gareth]

So is it not possible to critique Roadcraft?

What techniques do you think Roadcraft mandates? Have you analysed them in detail and assessed their effectiveness?

What techniques do you think are missing? Can you present a detailed analysis of them and explain what makes them more effective than any of those included in Roadcraft? Do you have any suggestions that don't fall foul of the two issues I mentioned?

In effect you seem to be asking for others to do the hard work of providing alternative answers but you're not saying what is wrong with Roadcraft in terms of being a skill that virtually any driver could master while at the same time keeping safety as the highest priority.

That isn't to say that drivers shouldn't learn additional techniques that have benefits in limited circumstances, but that clearly goes beyond the purpose and scope of Roadcraft.

[daz6215]

In effect you seem to be asking for others to do the hard work of providing alternative answers but you're not saying what is wrong with Roadcraft].

Your quite correct, and I've explained the reason why I wand others to do the hard work as you put it.

[daz6215]

So is it not possible to critique Roadcraft?

What techniques do you think Roadcraft mandates? Have you analysed them in detail and assessed their effectiveness?

What techniques do you think are missing? Can you present a detailed analysis of them and explain what makes them more effective than any of those included in Roadcraft? Do you have any suggestions that don't fall foul of the two issues I mentioned?

In effect you seem to be asking for others to do the hard work of providing alternative answers but you're not saying what is wrong with Roadcraft in terms of being a skill that virtually any driver could master while at the same time keeping safety as the highest priority.

That isn't to say that drivers shouldn't learn additional techniques that have benefits in limited circumstances, but that clearly goes beyond the purpose and scope of Roadcraft.

A simple Yes or No will do!

[Gareth]

Technique: smooth braking
Reason: stability
Pitfall: extended braking, sometimes excessively so

Further discussion:

There is a risk that drivers don't understand that the transitions are very important: smoothly onto the brakes, then after some firm braking, smoothly off the brakes. This misunderstanding can lead to drivers spreading braking out over a long distance, which has a number of downsides. One is that it is harder to modulate brake pressure when not braking firmly. Another is that it is harder to arrive at the end of braking at the desired speed - since the target for when braking needs to be completed is normally a physical feature. Another is that it can mislead other drivers waiting to emerge from minor roads. Yet another is that it can annoy following drivers if they are not expecting this pattern of behaviour.

This is mostly an issue when approaching a junction where the driver may be expecting to stop but hopes to be able proceed without stopping. Sometimes the long gentle braking is used to increase the amount of time available to observe other vehicles at the junction. One reason this is less effective is that long range observation at the start of gentle braking has less value than observation closer to the junction where it can be put to imminent use. A variation in the braking pressure within the period of firm braking can be used to initially scrub off most of the speed but spreading the latter part of braking to allow more time to observe, if required.

[daz6215]

Thank you!

[Gareth]

That's all very well, but pretty much that's all we do here. Someone identifies a problem, and various of us who are bothered to reply make suggestions about how Roadcraft can be interpreted differently to get a better result.

It's a heck of a lot easier responding to a specific circumstance, but as recent discussion shows can still lead to misunderstanding between those taking part, perhaps because someone reads only part of the sentence, or maybe because they don't 'hear' the tone being used by the writer, or perhaps because of preconceived notions.

And this is a poor second to actually trying out things in the car, perhaps by repeatedly trying a particular hazard to see what works well or less well.

[WhoseGeneration]

There is far too much agreement over the fundamentals here, and as a result we are discussing minutiae. That's because we have all learned advanced driving in the same school. What about the bigger questions?

There are great drivers out there who routinely make sequential downchanges while overlapping using H & T, and continue braking into the hazard. This permits a higher entry speed with safety; if you are already braking and a reason appears which requires more braking you can stop in a shorter distance than if you have to move your right foot from the accelerator to the brake, and then move the weight of the car forward before applying maximum braking. There are great drivers who believe that you should always signal unless it would mislead. There are great drivers who use the lights to show that they are yielding priority - and have checked that they are not leading another road user into danger. And there are even more great drivers who positively reject push/pull steering.

The Roadcraft system was designed to be readily teachable to people who don't need exceptional ability or enthusiasm, to enable them to make good but not maximum progress with reasonable safety, and to work consistently under pressure in the widest variety of circumstances. Those are the criteria against which I suggest that it should be judged.

Great post.