ADUK Archive

waremark wrote:Come on, you must know that GS is an examiner for both, and has stated that the pass threshold for IAM is the same as for Rospa Silver. I wonder whether for 2 fees he would assess you for both in the same drive!!!

I can remember the debate but not the outcome. RoADAR Silver = IAM pass seems reasonable, although the actual standard required is not that well-defined in my own mind.

regards
P.

Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

GS wrote:Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

....and no mention of pull-push being the principal steering method. Good; but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System.

I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

TripleS wrote:I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

If you entered yourself for the test (whether RoSPA or IAM), I'm sure you'd find out at the end of it (and I'm sure we'd be interested in hearing how you got on).

TripleS wrote:

GS wrote:Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

....and no mention of pull-push being the principal steering method. Good; but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System.

I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I expect a person who drives well in every other respect might also tend to arrive at least at an approximation of the system? It's not exactly a black art you know

I think the criteria for Rospa bronze mention 'inconsistent use of the system' (that's off the top of my head.......). I suspect much depends on the quality of the rest of the drive, ie if that's really the only issue and isn't causing any problems you might get a lenient view? I strongly suspect not many drives fall into this category though!

TripleS wrote:

GS wrote:Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

....and no mention of pull-push being the principal steering method. Good; but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System.

I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

If you take an IAM or RoSPA test you are examined against their views of what is 'Advanced Driving', not yours.

I have tested a number of people who have driven safely, but not driven how either the IAM or RoSPA expects / wants potential members to drive. I have told them that their drive was safe but not what I had to see, so they failed.

It's no good saying that you want to play rugby but by football rules! If you want to join the IAM or RoSPA you have to drive to their 'rules'. If you don't want to, don't try to join.

jont wrote:

TripleS wrote:I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

If you entered yourself for the test (whether RoSPA or IAM), I'm sure you'd find out at the end of it (and I'm sure we'd be interested in hearing how you got on).

It was merely a point of interest, but in terms of practicalities I see no merit in entering for tests of that sort, so this is not going to get us far.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

zadocbrown wrote:

TripleS wrote:

GS wrote:Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

....and no mention of pull-push being the principal steering method. Good; but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System.

I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I expect a person who drives well in every other respect might also tend to arrive at least at an approximation of the system? It's not exactly a black art you know

I think the criteria for Rospa bronze mention 'inconsistent use of the system' (that's off the top of my head.......). I suspect much depends on the quality of the rest of the drive, ie if that's really the only issue and isn't causing any problems you might get a lenient view? I strongly suspect not many drives fall into this category though!

Thank you. That seems a reasonable view of it, but the subject remains uncertain I guess.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

GS wrote:

TripleS wrote:

GS wrote:Safe, legal and smooth. Vehicle driven consistantly systematically, positioned for safety and vision, reasonable progress made during drive.

Dead easy!

....and no mention of pull-push being the principal steering method. Good; but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System.

I wonder what might the verdict be if someone did a drive that was good in all other respects, but didn't apply The System consistently in the prescribed manner. That's a genuine question and I would be interested to know the answer.

My feeling is that one ought to pass the test, but that is probably not what would happen.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

If you take an IAM or RoSPA test you are examined against their views of what is 'Advanced Driving', not yours.

I have tested a number of people who have driven safely, but not driven how either the IAM or RoSPA expects / wants potential members to drive. I have told them that their drive was safe but not what I had to see, so they failed.

It's no good saying that you want to play rugby but by football rules! If you want to join the IAM or RoSPA you have to drive to their 'rules'. If you don't want to, don't try to join.

Well, yes, quite!

Somewhat formalised thinking seems to be the IAM/RoSPA way, and it may suit you too - sorry if that sounds rude - but it's not my style. In any case the current IAM/RoSPA standards do not not tally with my notion of advanced driving, and to my mind having their certificate doesn't mean as much as it ought to mean.

Thank goodness some people with an interest in advanced driving do not confine themselves to that level. There was a time - many years ago - when I would have been proud to call myself an IAM Member, but it would now mean nothing to me.

As previously I accept this is very much a minority viewpoint, perhaps it is only my view.

Best wishes all,
Dave - a specialist in minority viewpoints.

TripleS wrote:Well, yes, quite!

Somewhat formalised thinking seems to be the IAM/RoSPA way, and it may suit you too - sorry if that sounds rude - but it's not my style. In any case the current IAM/RoSPA standards do not not tally with my notion of advanced driving, and to my mind having their certificate doesn't mean as much as it ought to mean.

Thank goodness some people with an interest in advanced driving do not confine themselves to that level. There was a time - many years ago - when I would have been proud to call myself an IAM Member, but it would now mean nothing to me.

As previously I accept this is very much a minority viewpoint, perhaps it is only my view.

Best wishes all,
Dave - a specialist in minority viewpoints.

Dave, I suppose the problem is, technically, is to call yourself an advanced driver, you need to have passed one of the DSA approved tests (I believe RoSPA is) and certainly IAM is. Whether you subscribe to their view is not the issue. I dont subscribe to the IAM's view on many things, although I have at least passed their test and believe since then, with many a pier review that I have now moved beyond IAM level. The trouble is, pier reviews, unless conducted by the right piers don't count for much I guess.

What you are saying is that you believe you are at least a certain standard (I know of many who have never backfilled to either IAM nor RoSPA). The problem is, in my view, a little too rigid but to do a test you have to have some benchmark and criteria. The IAM have made a reasonably good job at defining that criteria of what "basic" advanced driving is and as GS says, if you don't meet that criteria, you don't get the badge. If that isn't whats important to you, no problem. But how then do you claim you are advanced.

Maybe there should be some other criteria (this is what RoSPA have done, and the DIA). What exactly is "safe, systematic, smooth" etc.... who has the right criteria?

Interesting debate anywho.

TripleS wrote:Somewhat formalised thinking seems to be the IAM/RoSPA way, and it may suit you too - sorry if that sounds rude - but it's not my style. In any case the current IAM/RoSPA standards do not not tally with my notion of advanced driving, and to my mind having their certificate doesn't mean as much as it ought to mean.

What should a certificate mean - I am God's gift to driving?
It's a simple indication that a level has been reached. Many people pass exams every day by learning equations or theorems they'll never ever use again, but they learn them to pass the test.
It's not rocket science to do what the IAM want you to do to pass their test. Then you can move on (if you want).
But you seem to be saying now that if the IAM or RoADAR would accept your version of AD, then you might think about taking their test? It just doesn't work like that.
It would be like me going to BRAKE and saying, "if you just drop all the speed kills stuff and stop talking about children all the time, I'll support you."
Not going to happen!

crr003 wrote:

TripleS wrote:Somewhat formalised thinking seems to be the IAM/RoSPA way, and it may suit you too - sorry if that sounds rude - but it's not my style. In any case the current IAM/RoSPA standards do not not tally with my notion of advanced driving, and to my mind having their certificate doesn't mean as much as it ought to mean.

What should a certificate mean - I am God's gift to driving?
It's a simple indication that a level has been reached. Many people pass exams every day by learning equations or theorems they'll never ever use again, but they learn them to pass the test.
It's not rocket science to do what the IAM want you to do to pass their test. Then you can move on (if you want).
But you seem to be saying now that if the IAM or RoADAR would accept your version of AD, then you might think about taking their test? It just doesn't work like that.

[yoda mode]So sure are you ?[/yoda mode]

vonhosen wrote:[yoda mode]So sure are you ?[/yoda mode]

Which bit?
I know you can pass the IAM test with BGOL, and non Pull Push steering. If they're Dave's only hangups he could take the test. But now he wouldn't want to anyway!

It's getting like Groucho Marx: "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."

TripleS wrote "but I'd still be in a bit of bother with The System."

What is your problem with "The System" (of car control presumably)? It's the safest, smoothest and fastest method of negotiating EVERY-DAY ROAD hazards that I know.

To answer your other question, if a drive is otherwise very good then a Candidate should pass an IAM test (I can't speak for RoSPA) even if they don't quite comply with "the system", but probably only just pass. (How do you think most ADI's get through?) However, the drive must be safe, legal, smooth and with good progress but, if the driver is not complying to "the system", they must show that they are systematic in their drive inasmuch as their planning must be evident.

ROSPA you can only use BGOL as a driving plan Ie turning off on a hill where the car will run on if you do not cover the brakes. The test notes say pull push is expected even though the current roadcraft cover rotational pull push is the prefered method and the examinar will expect this. I don't know anyone who has passed a rospa without pull-push but BGOL will certainly lose you grades if you use without a good driving plan.