ericonabike wrote:Any thoughts on ... the general principle of assessment drives - are they intended to impart rules or to see if the assessee is driving safely or not?
ericonabike wrote:
Any thoughts on these two 'rules'? And on the general principle of assessment drives - are they intended to impart rules or to see if the assessee is driving safely or not?
jont wrote:they're designed to raise revenue for the instructing company and allow the employer to tick the H&S box in case their employees kill themselves while driving for work /cynic
driverpete wrote:The Tyres and Tarmac rule is useful for beginners who might not be able to work out how far back they need to be to get round the car in front if he has an issue, but I wouldn't have thought it necessary for an experienced driver who knows their own car and its capabilities..
gannet wrote:as for 4th for 30mph... I'm very rarely up that high in the gearbox at that speed 3rd is far far more flexible and barely any more fuel efficient IMO
bbllr87 wrote:gannet wrote:as for 4th for 30mph... I'm very rarely up that high in the gearbox at that speed 3rd is far far more flexible and barely any more fuel efficient IMO
Nor am I, though Dad complained at puffin for exactly that yesterday.
My car seems to think that it would be more fuel efficient by displaying its little "Change up a gear" arrow whenever I am in 3rd at 30. I have learnt to ignore it!
martine wrote:jont wrote:they're designed to raise revenue for the instructing company and allow the employer to tick the H&S box in case their employees kill themselves while driving for work /cynic
That's a bit harsh! Having done assessments for 3 different companies so far the tick box mentality is there to a certain extent but the other reasons are: moral responsibility to employees and good ol' hard cash - better drivers save the company money (fuel, maintenance, less RTCs, better resale value etc).
ericonabike wrote:First post [other than in the intro section].
In my last job the majority of the workforce, including me, drove company cars. There was a policy whereby any driver with a poor accident record had to have their driving assessed by 'an advanced driver' [not sure exactly what their qualifications were, but we paid them to do it]. I successfully argued that this could be of benefit to all, and went out for my session hoping to get some insights into what I was doing well or badly.
It didn't start too well. As we approached my car I was chastised for having tinted windows. I pointed out that only the rear windows were tinted, not the front. 'Well it looked like they were' he replied, somewhat ungraciously. But it got better. I changed one aspect of my driving as a result [distance between cars in stationary traffic], but refused to change one other [gear to use in 30 limits].
He told me I was not leaving enough of a gap between me and car in front when stopped. My first introduction to the 'rubber and road' principle. I protested that I'd always been taught that if I could read the number plate of the car in front, that would leave sufficient gap. It then dawned on me that 30 odd years ago, cars used to have their number plates below the rear bumper. Since then they've been positioned higher up the car, luring me ever closer! A useful reminder not to follow a 'rule' too slavishly?
He wanted me always to use 4th in 30 limits. I argued against, saying that 3rd gave me much more control, that 30 equated to 2,000 rpm and that it gave an audible warning [over-revving] if I went over the limit. The only argument in favour of 4th appeared to be that of fuel economy - in that case why not use 5th! We agreed to differ - and I do not believe that using 4th would have made me a 'better driver'.
Any thoughts on these two 'rules'? And on the general principle of assessment drives - are they intended to impart rules or to see if the assessee is driving safely or not?
gannet wrote:bbllr87 wrote:Dad complained at puffin for exactly that yesterday.
Dad has his views...
jont wrote:ericonabike wrote:Any thoughts on ... the general principle of assessment drives - are they intended to impart rules or to see if the assessee is driving safely or not?
they're designed to raise revenue for the instructing company and allow the employer to tick the H&S box in case their employees kill themselves while driving for work /cynic
Gareth wrote:gannet wrote:bbllr87 wrote:Dad complained at puffin for exactly that yesterday.
Dad has his views...
You may not remember when it was common for petrol-engined cars to be happy at 30 mph in 4th, providing the road was only a slight incline or less. Since then cars have become heavier, petrol engines have become higher rev'ing, and turbo-diesel engines have become fairly prevalent.
Return to Advanced Driving Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests