ADUK Archive

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 2:32 pm**

IanB wrote:
TR4ffic wrote:
...if I have to brake to slow for a bend I'm deemed to have misjudged the approach

I'm sorry, but IMO this seems an awfully odd approach to AD..! Since when aren’t we supposed to be using brakes? Travelling along a good road at or near NSL, how long is it going to take you to get rid of 40 odd mph to take a tight-ish bend? I don’t think the traffic behind would be very pleased…

A daft idea

Hence the reason why I wrote "There are obvious exceptions"
In this case you would be braking to aid deceleration, rather than to overcome excess acceleration which you had applied through misjudgement.

Sorry, Ian, but perhaps its the way your post comes across... I can see where you are coming from when talking about accelerating too much in clear sight of a hazard/bend that you then have to immediately brake for, but there is a big difference between 'braking ...to overcome excess acceleration which you had applied through misjudgement' and 'if I have to brake to slow for a bend I'm deemed to have misjudged the approach'

I would consider it 'the norm' to apporpriately apply acceleration and apply brakes to reduce speed in a perfectly judged approach... In my eyes at least, your obvious exceptions aren't actually exceptions...

...or have I missed something?

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 2:42 pm**

IanB wrote:Yes I think I understood what Dom was saying. I just got the impression that in his region, rather more and firm use of the brakes would be expected on a Masters/SA drive than in mine. He'll no doubt be along to clarify.

Ancient is correct, I have only been to one training day, in 2010 so I don't know 100% what is or isn't required.

Insure The Box said that it was too much though.

Dom

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 2:53 pm**

Perhaps it doesn't come across as intended. In the context of Dom's statement re the telematics and the SA drive, I would doubt that the box would mark one's driving down for braking, based on my expectation of a Masters drive. I have no doubt that the acceleration used and the cornering speeds would result in a poor score.

Oops, you posted before me Dom.

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 3:13 pm**

IanB wrote:Perhaps it doesn't come across as intended. In the context of Dom's statement re the telematics and the SA drive, I would doubt that the box would mark one's driving down for braking, based on my expectation of a Masters drive. I have no doubt that the acceleration used and the cornering speeds would result in a poor score.

Oops, you posted before me Dom.

Well, mine was certainly no Masters drive, but a drive which John described as:

jcochrane wrote:Although suggestions were made about smoothness at no times was it unsafe or that un-smooth to have such an apparent effect on the results.

Resulted in a 'score' from Telematics of 6% ! This included several instances of what their analysing computer considered overly strong braking. Their site allows me to review the location these occurred and I would still expect to approach each at a reasonable speed and reduce that speed by using the brakes. One for example was a downhill 90degree turn (I didn't H&T on that occasion either, so braking was not left late

).

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 3:52 pm**

Ancient wrote:
jcochrane wrote:Although suggestions were made about smoothness at no times was it unsafe or that un-smooth to have such an apparent effect on the results.

Resulted in a 'score' from Telematics of 6% !

Well I think the challenge is obvious. Next time you drive with John you need to ensure he remains similarly complementary (or asleep - either will do) and get the score closer to zero

.

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 3:58 pm**

GJD wrote:
Ancient wrote:
jcochrane wrote:Although suggestions were made about smoothness at no times was it unsafe or that un-smooth to have such an apparent effect on the results.

Resulted in a 'score' from Telematics of 6% !

Well I think the challenge is obvious. Next time you drive with John you need to ensure he remains similarly complementary (or asleep - either will do) and get the score closer to zero .

I can probably find some twistier roads if it would help :twisted:

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 4:59 pm**

GJD wrote:
Ancient wrote:
jcochrane wrote:Although suggestions were made about smoothness at no times was it unsafe or that un-smooth to have such an apparent effect on the results.

Resulted in a 'score' from Telematics of 6% !

Well I think the challenge is obvious. Next time you drive with John you need to ensure he remains similarly complementary (or asleep - either will do) and get the score closer to zero .

Now I'm outraged, defamation of character and all that. To suggest I might fall asleep as a passenger. I thought I made it clear, when we drove together last weekend, that I only nod off when I'm driving. :oops:

I didn't fall asleep or did I :?:

Can't remember for sure.

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 5:19 pm**

The Telematics company also have some online training modules - which I just zipped through. 100% on the theoreticals but failed abysmally on the "hazard perception". I mean for example, you are on a narrow, one-way busy shopping road with lots of pedestrian traffic and parked cars to the left reducing the width to one lane. Which are the most pressing hazards that will affect the speed you drive:
The cars to your immediate left potentially concealing pedestrians in their gaps?
The cars to your immediate left potentially having doors thrown open?
The pedestrians to your immediate right potentially stepping off the (narrow) pavement?
The car 5 car-lengths ahead indicating their intention of moving out?

You have three chances of indicating the most important one.

I repeatedly selected the first three.

Apparently it is the car 5 lengths away: :shock:

Does this mean my safe speed in this environment is such that I can stop in 5 car lengths :roll:

?

Posted: **Thu May 23, 2013 5:25 pm**

Ancient wrote::lol:
The Telematics company also have some online training modules - which I just zipped through. 100% on the theoreticals but failed abysmally on the "hazard perception". I mean for example, you are on a narrow, one-way busy shopping road with lots of pedestrian traffic and parked cars to the left reducing the width to one lane. Which are the most pressing hazards that will affect the speed you drive:
The cars to your immediate left potentially concealing pedestrians in their gaps?
The cars to your immediate left potentially having doors thrown open?
The pedestrians to your immediate right potentially stepping off the (narrow) pavement?
The car 5 car-lengths ahead indicating their intention of moving out?

You have three chances of indicating the most important one.

I repeatedly selected the first three.

Apparently it is the car 5 lengths away: Does this mean my safe speed in this environment is such that I can stop in 5 car lengths ?

5 car lengths - around 20-25m, so 20mph given that stopping distance requirement? Well, that's within any likely speed limit so it must be safe :roll:

ADUK Archive

Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car

Re: Telematics monitoring your car