hpcdriver wrote:TripleS wrote:the way IAM people drive - certainly to meet their test standard - seems to me untypical of how they are likely to drive generally.
and
My problem is that the IAM way is too stuffy about some details that really do not matter that much. Steering is an example of this, but we've been through that previously. They are too prescriptive, and relaxing some of their demands would not be detrimental IMHO. Indeed it might encourage more people to join the IAM, and on balance that would be better.
It was good to meet you today Dave, and to put a face to the name. Thanks for coming so far.
IAM is more flexible than you believe, so long as the drive is safe, systematic (and the interpretation of systematic can be flexible), smooth and at a suitable speed. Your particular observer seems to have given you an idea of very rigid requirements. Well, remember that observers are well-meaning volunteers, and are fallible. Perhaps they find it easier to tell you how to steer than to enhance your level of observation and planning or sense of pace. Perhaps even they find it difficult to admit that there is not much to teach you in the areas which really matter - if that is the case.Talk to a senior examiner and you will probably find that they are far less rigid.
With the sole exception of attitude to speed limits, I try to drive all the time as I would for an IAM Test. Of course I make mistakes, particularly when I am not applying the level of concentration which I would for a test - but I do try.
So Sally/Lady Godiva, I say keep up your efforts and don't be put off by Dave.
Having re read TripleS' comments, I believe it was his reference to 'special' and 'artificial' that I don't understand.
I was out for a longish run yesterday, in excess of 2 hours there, then driving around all day, then 2 hours back. I tried to maintain the IAM way every second I was driving. While doing this, I was obviously thinking about what I was doing and why I was doing it.
I felt in extreme control at all times, and many instances where I felt I was (hopefully) demonstrating observation, anticipation, etc., etc. I applied the 'System' at every single hazard, including turns into junctions, temporary traffic lights, overtaking, parking etc. But, there was not one thing that I felt was special or artificial. Safe, yes. In control, defintely. Systematic, without a doubt. But artificial...not at all.
I respect everyones right to decide whether or not to ascribe to the IAM (or any other Advanced) method. I just dont see where it can be seen as either special or artificial. I'm not being deliberately obtuse, I would just like someone to point it out to me. I am considering becoming an Observer, so the more I can understand different viewpoints, the more I may be able to help others.
By the way (unlike everyone else it seems) I really don't have a problem with pull/pull steering. I find it perfectly easy, natural and simple to apply. It may just be me, but it never slows me down, and I never find it unnatural. I also adhere to the limits; it is my personal decision as I believe it is right for me.
I await David's comments with anticipation, and I appreciate hpcdrivers encouragement.
Regards
Sally
We were put through both skid pan and manoeuvrability courses using pull/push. When we started the course we all thought we would be faster crossing hands etc. and were probably notching 2 minute times. By the end of the course and on final test hitting the 1 min 20 sec target time was easily achievable using pull/push and I would honestly defy anyone to have driven faster (and as smooth), steering any other way.
.
).
