IAM masters/RoSPA gold?

[GS]

[
When I took my ADI tests I was a class 1 driver.

I even got an open road NSL overtake in which really surprised him. He REALLY watched the speedo as I did this!

It is often said that class 1 drivers are programmed to make progress. When I took my PCV and HGV courses the courses started with the instructor saying along the lines off, this is not about progress, driving these vehicles is different to a patrol car or bike, so forget progress. Some find this difficult to do!

Hi GS

Again totally agree with your comments.

On a Pt2 you are expected to make progress however if you had exceeded the speed limit doing so you would have failed.

On my IAM test there was a lot of emphasis on progress by the ex police class I examiner. If you have driven a certain way for 20 or 30 years chasing criminals it is very hard to get out of the habit of driving that way.
To me my IAM examiner expected watered down pursuit driving. I have 2 fast cars however it isn't a style of driving that is natural to me or one that the companies I work for wish their drivers to be trained in.

Rob

This is something that often comes up when discussing the IAM test, funnily not so much with the RoSPA tests for some reason.

Some examiners think it is a police test and they want to see a police drive. Some examiners even used to encourage candidates to exceed speed limits like they did on their police course! In my view, too much emphasis is placed on speed, or 'progress', by too many observers and examiners. There is far more to being a good driver than to be able to drive fast. Again in my view, this has not been helped by some people including police references when describing IAM standards. There are hundreds of IAM examiners and no doubt they all have their own likes, dislikes and expectations based on their experience. They often forget that the IAM is not the police and the standards and expectations should not be the same.

[akirk]

when I did the IAM - they were very clear that speed limits should be observed...
making good progress doesn't simply mean going fast / breaking speed limits - it means wise and full use of the terrain / car / etc. within the conditions that exist...

Alasdair

[RobC]

On my IAM test I didn't exceed the speed limit so I couldn't say if I would have passed if I did, however The examiner did expect hard acceleration up to speed limits and fairly heavy braking into speed limits.
He also said that if he was on his motorcycle his front wheel would be offsiding and almost touching the right hand kerb on left hand bends.

[TripleS]

On my IAM test I didn't exceed the speed limit so I couldn't say if I would have passed if I did, however The examiner did expect hard acceleration up to speed limits and fairly heavy braking into speed limits.
He also said that if he was on his motorcycle his front wheel would be offsiding and almost touching the right hand kerb on left hand bends.

Well I hope I don't meet him on the road!

Maybe you've not said what you meant to say.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Horse]

On my IAM test I didn't exceed the speed limit so I couldn't say if I would have passed if I did, however The examiner did expect hard acceleration up to speed limits and fairly heavy braking into speed limits.
He also said that if he was on his motorcycle his front wheel would be offsiding and almost touching the right hand kerb on left hand bends.

http://www.iam.org.uk/images/stories/Me ... july14.pdf

16. Definition clarification: ‘Off-siding’ = the crossing of the centre line/hazard line, (or in the absence of such a line, the centre of the carriageway) in order to extend a view.
Off-siding* – Single track road clarification:
In situations where there is no possibility of passing an oncoming vehicle due to the width of the road and in order to enable your presence to be seen earlier, this is acceptable, providing it is both advantageous and gives no risk of conflict.
Off-siding (to extend view) – two-way carriageway clarification:
Experience is showing that this is causing Candidates to put themselves in danger. The IAM actively discourages this practice and it is therefore not acceptable on test.

[Gareth]

The IAM very unhelpfully didn't distinguish between moving out to increase vision versus moving out to maintain vision, and tarred one with the issues of the other.

[IcedKiwi]

The IAM very unhelpfully didn't distinguish between moving out to increase vision versus moving out to maintain vision, and tarred one with the issues of the other.

I guess it depends whether the extend view part of "Off-siding (to extend view)" means to extend vision above what you have already or extend vision above what you would have if you didn't offside.

[RobC]

On my IAM test I didn't exceed the speed limit so I couldn't say if I would have passed if I did, however The examiner did expect hard acceleration up to speed limits and fairly heavy braking into speed limits.
He also said that if he was on his motorcycle his front wheel would be offsiding and almost touching the right hand kerb on left hand bends.

Well I hope I don't meet him on the road!

Maybe you've not said what you meant to say.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Hi Dave its exactly what the examiner said and what I meant. Was rather surprised myself, It was an IAM test not a Police chase

Rob

[RobC]

On my IAM test I didn't exceed the speed limit so I couldn't say if I would have passed if I did, however The examiner did expect hard acceleration up to speed limits and fairly heavy braking into speed limits.
He also said that if he was on his motorcycle his front wheel would be offsiding and almost touching the right hand kerb on left hand bends.

http://www.iam.org.uk/images/stories/Me ... july14.pdf

Experience is showing that this is causing Candidates to put themselves in danger. The IAM actively discourages this practice and it is therefore not acceptable on test.[/quote]

Hi Horse

Prior to my IAM test, the examiner had said in talks at our local IAM meetings that off siding was 'acceptable' on test.
On my IAM test he said that not only was it acceptable but I should have done it. Our group has this in writing in writing.... amongst other things.

Its also on your link above

17. Set of open bends – straight-lining/trimming clarification:
Trimming or straight-lining a set of open bends whilst acceptable on test
must not be carried out if there is a risk of conflict with other road users
or where it will inconvenience, confuse or cause alarm or distress, to
others.
If the Candidate compromises their own or any other road user’s safety
they will fail the test.

Rob

[WhoseGeneration]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... iving.html

Whilst members here debate which is the highest AD standard, the above shows how many approach driving.
That exhibit, along with others in the same vein, helps to explain the authorities' approach to road safety.
Ie, try to deal with the lowest of ability.

[WhoseGeneration]

This is something that often comes up when discussing the IAM test, funnily not so much with the RoSPA tests for some reason.

Some examiners think it is a police test and they want to see a police drive. Some examiners even used to encourage candidates to exceed speed limits like they did on their police course! In my view, too much emphasis is placed on speed, or 'progress', by too many observers and examiners. There is far more to being a good driver than to be able to drive fast. Again in my view, this has not been helped by some people including police references when describing IAM standards. There are hundreds of IAM examiners and no doubt they all have their own likes, dislikes and expectations based on their experience. They often forget that the IAM is not the police and the standards and expectations should not be the same.

Well, at the risk of being considered non pc, or old, this was the reason I, long ago, signed up to the IAM.
The subtext back then was, you want to a better fast driver, follow Roadcraft and apply the principles therein. Yes, on my test, the examiner said I could exceed the limit for overtakes.
Then, when I was an Observer, I had a yearly check by a Class 1 and he wanted to really see my driving ability.
Hasn't failed me since, except, it's now hard, as a civilian, to go fast.
Oh well, it's presumably DVSA standard, with eco driving , from now on.
Why would I bother with the IAM or any other AD organisations now?
Tbh, I'm totally frustrated by how the Government approaches road safety. The simplest means of safety is the two seconds rule, in ideal conditions, yet it is not enforced.

[Horse]

The simplest means of safety is the two seconds rule, in ideal conditions, yet it is not enforced.

Yet.

IIRC There are research projects underway to determine whether enforcement can be carried out reliably and sensibly - eg automatic detection as with speeding, but so you don't suffer as a consequence of another driver moving in front just as you past the detection equipment.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Germany already has following distance cameras on autobahns.

[akirk]

Germany already has following distance cameras on autobahns.

how do they work?
- at a technical level
- at a legislative level when the driver has no way of confirming distance?

sounds difficult to enforce, so interesting that they have them

Alasdair

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

I believe they take photographs showing speed and the time gap between them. Some discussion I found says they use one fixed and one mobile camera. I also found some information about the rules for minimum distance, which is speed related. Nothing very concrete, though. I'll have another look tomorrow.