I took a phone call from a prospective pupil the other day. She was complaining about her present instructor – not Hamilton, I hasten to add! It seems he regularly used his mobile phone while instructing, though obviously not instructing because his mind was at times elsewhere. I was sympathetic with her and said I understood her frustration, pointing out it is illegal for a driving instructor, in charge of the vehicle to take or make hand held phone calls. I was able to organise a Hamilton instructor for her and I understand from feedback from our instructor she is much happier now.
Another recent conversation with a parent revealed an instructor who apparently had been making inappropriate comments to her daughter during lessons. The instructor was asking about her boyfriend and seemed to be looking at her rather than the road. The pupil, a vulnerable 17-year old, was beginning to feel uncomfortable and fearing her lessons. Thank goodness she told her mother and by contacting me we have able to arrange one of my driving instructors to look after her daughter. I asked him to call her direct to allay any concerns and lessons have now been set up with her daughter. I advised the mother to contact the Driving Standards Agency to make a formal complaint. She had spoken to the previous driving school, who apparently said there had been no previous problems with this instructor. The impression is the matter is going no further and the instructor is free to abuse his position as an instructor with other vulnerable young girls.
Safety checks have been set up to protect vulnerable young people. All instructors have to have Criminal Record Checks (CRB) before a license to instruct is issued or renewed. All instructors have to have a “check test” every 2-4 years to examine their instructional ability. Unfortunately nothing is full proof and a few can slip through the net. All I can advise is that every parent or guardian should keep a watchful eye on how driving lessons are conducted and that the new driver feels they are gaining from the experience without any sense of discomfort. If anything seems out of place – change instructors! I don’t wish to appear alarmist as most instructors conduct themselves professionally for the good of the pupil and the successful transition from new driver to fully qualified is an ongoing process throughout the UK. The vast majority of new drivers pass (maybe not the first time) without any serious problems, I just ask any parent to be watchful.
Monday, 13 February 2012
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Checktest
Checktest
I recently had a checktest. This is a test of instructional ability carried out by the Driving Standards Agency to make sure driving instructors are performing up to a required standard. At the end of the checktest the instructor is graded between 1 and 6. Grades 1,2 and 3 are unsatisfactory and would require another checktest within a short space of time and if there were no improvement, could lead to the instructor losing their license to instruct for payment. Grades 4,5 and 6 are acceptable, 6 being the highest grade attainable. No further checktest required for 2 to 4 years depending on the grade attained.
The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) prefers to assess an actual lesson with the supervising examiner sitting in the back of the car during a driving lesson. Where the instructor is unable to provide a pupil, DSA will accept role-play with the supervising examiner acting in the role of a pupil.
Either way the instructor has the advantage of choosing the topic for instruction, so he/she is not unprepared for the lesson. As my personal instruction is far less now and I spend much of my time in the running of the driving school, I chose role-play.
At the appointed time and day, I met up with the supervising examiner and he gave me an outline of his role-play pupil. As we set off to find the car. I made sure I didn’t have to actually check his license or eyesight before starting the driving lesson and I checked very carefully he was okay to drive from the main road. Normally, I would never allow this, preferring to find a quiet road to introduce the car and its controls. His role was near test standard so it wasn’t a problem.
The supervising instructor will drive with some driving faults and he/she is looking for these to be identified and corrected. Where I went wrong was not in the identification but in my response. Basically he was driving a little too fast on approach to junctions, I didn’t feel it was a serious problem and referred to it on a number of occasions but he continued to drive the same way. I should have pulled him over and explained in more detail the problems that can occur when driving too fast for given situations. End result I was given a grade 5. I’m okay with that and felt it was a fair result. No further checktest for another 4 years – hopefully!
I recently had a checktest. This is a test of instructional ability carried out by the Driving Standards Agency to make sure driving instructors are performing up to a required standard. At the end of the checktest the instructor is graded between 1 and 6. Grades 1,2 and 3 are unsatisfactory and would require another checktest within a short space of time and if there were no improvement, could lead to the instructor losing their license to instruct for payment. Grades 4,5 and 6 are acceptable, 6 being the highest grade attainable. No further checktest required for 2 to 4 years depending on the grade attained.
The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) prefers to assess an actual lesson with the supervising examiner sitting in the back of the car during a driving lesson. Where the instructor is unable to provide a pupil, DSA will accept role-play with the supervising examiner acting in the role of a pupil.
Either way the instructor has the advantage of choosing the topic for instruction, so he/she is not unprepared for the lesson. As my personal instruction is far less now and I spend much of my time in the running of the driving school, I chose role-play.
At the appointed time and day, I met up with the supervising examiner and he gave me an outline of his role-play pupil. As we set off to find the car. I made sure I didn’t have to actually check his license or eyesight before starting the driving lesson and I checked very carefully he was okay to drive from the main road. Normally, I would never allow this, preferring to find a quiet road to introduce the car and its controls. His role was near test standard so it wasn’t a problem.
The supervising instructor will drive with some driving faults and he/she is looking for these to be identified and corrected. Where I went wrong was not in the identification but in my response. Basically he was driving a little too fast on approach to junctions, I didn’t feel it was a serious problem and referred to it on a number of occasions but he continued to drive the same way. I should have pulled him over and explained in more detail the problems that can occur when driving too fast for given situations. End result I was given a grade 5. I’m okay with that and felt it was a fair result. No further checktest for another 4 years – hopefully!
Tuesday, 8 November 2011
Motorway Pile-Up
Yet again! Yes, a tragedy with the loss of 7 lives and 51 injured: 37 vehicles including 3 lorries ploughing into each other on the northbound section of the M5 near Taunton. It was last Friday evening 4th November at 8.30pm that the mayhem leading to a fireball took place.
The police investigation is focusing on a nearby Guy Fawkes bonfire display. Witnesses have been referring to smoke drifting across the M5 carriageways seriously affecting visibility. The conditions were bad enough with wet roads following rain and fog patches in places, and I read on teletext yesterday somebody observing that it was an unlit section of motorway that added to the series of vehicles crashing into each other.
I don’t wish to make light of a dreadful incident with a play on words but reference to smoke, fog, wet conditions and lighting is just a smoke screen. If people drove at a speed to suit the conditions and left a SAFE FOLLOWING DISTANCE, none of this would have happened. I see it every day as I drive around my local A3 Kingston-Upon-Thames, a three-lane each way dual carriageway. Drivers exceeding the 50mph speed limit (between cameras) and just driving too close with no anticipation of a sudden change or heavy braking leading to the potential ensuing chaos. Why don’t they learn!!
Unfortunately provisional license holders are not allowed on motorways and don’t get the training for dealing with higher speeds. The vast majority of drivers are never tested again for the remainder of their driving adult years and there is not enough policing, let alone penalties for bad and dangerous driving. It really is a recipe for disaster and this continues to be the case.
I would like to see the Government take action to educate drivers. The recent demise of Sir Jimmy Saville reminds me of a TV campaign he championed back in the 70’s when the dangers of not wearing a seatbelt were highlighted by a peach being struck with a hammer. The Jimmy Saville phrase “clunk, click every trip” became widely recognised and contributed to the resultant reduction in injuries and fatalities, just showing how successful this type of “persuasion” can be. Why can’t the Government take up the mantel for “following distances” The benefits to the economy, emergency services and a reduction in the dreadful loss to friends and family would be huge and more than compensate for any financial outlay.
All the Government are considering at the moment is raising the speed limit to 80mph!!!
The police investigation is focusing on a nearby Guy Fawkes bonfire display. Witnesses have been referring to smoke drifting across the M5 carriageways seriously affecting visibility. The conditions were bad enough with wet roads following rain and fog patches in places, and I read on teletext yesterday somebody observing that it was an unlit section of motorway that added to the series of vehicles crashing into each other.
I don’t wish to make light of a dreadful incident with a play on words but reference to smoke, fog, wet conditions and lighting is just a smoke screen. If people drove at a speed to suit the conditions and left a SAFE FOLLOWING DISTANCE, none of this would have happened. I see it every day as I drive around my local A3 Kingston-Upon-Thames, a three-lane each way dual carriageway. Drivers exceeding the 50mph speed limit (between cameras) and just driving too close with no anticipation of a sudden change or heavy braking leading to the potential ensuing chaos. Why don’t they learn!!
Unfortunately provisional license holders are not allowed on motorways and don’t get the training for dealing with higher speeds. The vast majority of drivers are never tested again for the remainder of their driving adult years and there is not enough policing, let alone penalties for bad and dangerous driving. It really is a recipe for disaster and this continues to be the case.
I would like to see the Government take action to educate drivers. The recent demise of Sir Jimmy Saville reminds me of a TV campaign he championed back in the 70’s when the dangers of not wearing a seatbelt were highlighted by a peach being struck with a hammer. The Jimmy Saville phrase “clunk, click every trip” became widely recognised and contributed to the resultant reduction in injuries and fatalities, just showing how successful this type of “persuasion” can be. Why can’t the Government take up the mantel for “following distances” The benefits to the economy, emergency services and a reduction in the dreadful loss to friends and family would be huge and more than compensate for any financial outlay.
All the Government are considering at the moment is raising the speed limit to 80mph!!!
Wednesday, 5 October 2011
Proposed 80mph Speed Limit
It has been announced by the Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond, that a consultation is to take place to raise the national speed limit to 80mph. A full public consultation will take place by the end of this year and any recommendations will be implemented by the year 2013.
70mph was set as the national speed limit back in 1965 and the argument in favour of the increase, claims that vehicle safety has changed dramatically over the last 45 years and the increase will contribute to reduced travel times improving the economic climate by hundreds of millions of pounds.
Another advantage, it is claimed, is the change would bring the 49% of motorway drivers who regularly break the existing speed limit within the boundaries of the law. Perhaps that argument is a good reason to increase the mostly unnecessary 20mph zones so loved by local councils back to 30mph, but that is another issue!
Increasing the speed limit flies in the face of those arguing that increased fuel consumption as a result of this proposed change will further damage the environment. Crashes at 70mph are bad enough and higher speeds will inevitably lead to an increase in road fatalities.
The only reason so many drivers regularly break the existing speed limit of 70mph is lack of policing. Perhaps the better option might be to leave things as they are. Those wishing to risk a fine know the choices, but a sensible restriction bound by law will hopefully discourage further excesses. Increase the speed limit to 80mph and drivers will see this as a green flag to break that as well.
Don’t forget there is an allowance of 10% plus 2mph anyway to allow for any discrepancies from speedometer to actual speed, so drivers don’t get convictions up to 79mph anyway!
70mph was set as the national speed limit back in 1965 and the argument in favour of the increase, claims that vehicle safety has changed dramatically over the last 45 years and the increase will contribute to reduced travel times improving the economic climate by hundreds of millions of pounds.
Another advantage, it is claimed, is the change would bring the 49% of motorway drivers who regularly break the existing speed limit within the boundaries of the law. Perhaps that argument is a good reason to increase the mostly unnecessary 20mph zones so loved by local councils back to 30mph, but that is another issue!
Increasing the speed limit flies in the face of those arguing that increased fuel consumption as a result of this proposed change will further damage the environment. Crashes at 70mph are bad enough and higher speeds will inevitably lead to an increase in road fatalities.
The only reason so many drivers regularly break the existing speed limit of 70mph is lack of policing. Perhaps the better option might be to leave things as they are. Those wishing to risk a fine know the choices, but a sensible restriction bound by law will hopefully discourage further excesses. Increase the speed limit to 80mph and drivers will see this as a green flag to break that as well.
Don’t forget there is an allowance of 10% plus 2mph anyway to allow for any discrepancies from speedometer to actual speed, so drivers don’t get convictions up to 79mph anyway!
Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Cyclists
It’s official. There are now 13 million cyclists in the UK. They range from young children getting early experience of dealing with traffic to the elderly who have been doing it for years. There are a lot of cycling enthusiasts these days too. Success at recent Olympics has certainly put cycling on the map. There are of course cash-strapped students and those influenced by environmental issues (carbon emissions). The ever-increasing numbers does inevitably mean more conflict with motorists and of course it is the cyclist who comes off worst.
The most recent figures show road fatalities have dropped in the UK to below 2,000 for the first time since records began way back in 1926, to 1857 in 2010. At the same time a rise of 7% in cyclist fatalities was recorded. Seriously injured cyclists rose by 2% to 2660. Motor vehicle traffic fell by 2% due to the economic downturn and the harsh winter had its part to play in the overall figures, so the rise in cyclist casualties does stand out as going against the other figures produced. Increased cyclist numbers does of course have a bearing.
Cyclists are not the most popular road users and they bring it on themselves by flouting the rules of the road. One shouldn’t generalise but there are too many cyclists who don’t think red lights, one-way streets and the rules for pedestrian crossings apply to them. How often do you see a cyclist at night with little or no adequate lighting? They don’t need a license, appear unaccountable and contribute nothing to the upkeep of our road system. The police seem to pay little heed to their disregard for the law.
The car driver sits stuck in a queue as the cyclist weaves his way in, out and around cars, buses and lorries with impunity until they are not seen and come crashing down to an abrupt halt – and who has to prove their innocence – why, the motorist of course! How often does it reach the headlines when a cyclist trying to squeeze past the nearside of a lorry is crushed to death against iron railings or some other restriction?
“Think bike” aimed primarily to protect motorcyclists must also be applied to pushbikes and I believe it has to be the responsibility of the cyclist to be aware they are not easily seen. Reflective clothing, adequate lighting at night and an acceptance of their vulnerability might help to reduce the number of dead and injured on our roads.
The most recent figures show road fatalities have dropped in the UK to below 2,000 for the first time since records began way back in 1926, to 1857 in 2010. At the same time a rise of 7% in cyclist fatalities was recorded. Seriously injured cyclists rose by 2% to 2660. Motor vehicle traffic fell by 2% due to the economic downturn and the harsh winter had its part to play in the overall figures, so the rise in cyclist casualties does stand out as going against the other figures produced. Increased cyclist numbers does of course have a bearing.
Cyclists are not the most popular road users and they bring it on themselves by flouting the rules of the road. One shouldn’t generalise but there are too many cyclists who don’t think red lights, one-way streets and the rules for pedestrian crossings apply to them. How often do you see a cyclist at night with little or no adequate lighting? They don’t need a license, appear unaccountable and contribute nothing to the upkeep of our road system. The police seem to pay little heed to their disregard for the law.
The car driver sits stuck in a queue as the cyclist weaves his way in, out and around cars, buses and lorries with impunity until they are not seen and come crashing down to an abrupt halt – and who has to prove their innocence – why, the motorist of course! How often does it reach the headlines when a cyclist trying to squeeze past the nearside of a lorry is crushed to death against iron railings or some other restriction?
“Think bike” aimed primarily to protect motorcyclists must also be applied to pushbikes and I believe it has to be the responsibility of the cyclist to be aware they are not easily seen. Reflective clothing, adequate lighting at night and an acceptance of their vulnerability might help to reduce the number of dead and injured on our roads.
Monday, 13 June 2011
Communication
A bit of a gap since my last entry but I have been away, albeit only for one week!
Continuing with the theme of communication, drivers are not totally reliant on signals – and just as well, with so many ignoring the basic courtesy of letting others know their intentions.
Brake lights inform the following vehicles you are slowing down, or could it be you are too close to the car in front and have to keep braking as an overreaction to closing in on the car ahead of you. An automatic vehicle requires more use of the brakes, as there is less control. The driver is unable to use engine braking to slow the car down. By coming off the gas in a manual car the gearbox will hold the car back, but this is less so in an automatic and I was surprised to find the life of the front brakes was reduced by 50% comparing automatic to manual. The automatic will eventually slow without gas being applied (not travelling downhill though), but braking will be the more likely way of holding the car back. Watch out for the driver continually applying the footbrake. This is somebody who is not planning ahead, is an anxious driver and possibly elderly with limited concentration.
Whether it’s manual or automatic, leave space between you and the vehicle in front, especially following a larger vehicle because your view ahead is blocked and you cannot see what is developing ahead. Leaving space does make driving safer. You can plan further ahead and have plenty of time to respond to an ever-changing situation. And if a car takes the space, so what, hold back and recreate the same following distance. What have you lost? In fact, if they were an aggressive driver I would rather have them in front than following too close behind.
Leaving space can allow vehicles to emerge from sideroads, thus helping them and the general flow of traffic. What's wrong with that? I like helping others out and it could be me in a sideroad in the future waiting to join the main traffic flow. Seeing it from both points of view can reduce selfish driving. Don't let too many out though, you will upset the driver behind you!
Oncoming vehicles can’t see your brakelights (obviously), but speed and position is the key to your and their intentions. A vehicle approaching a left or right turn without slowing is unlikely to be turning, whereas a slowing vehicle probably is, so you can anticipate a situation without the added information of indicators.
Brakelights from the vehicle in front can help in a meeting situation. Imagine you are following a car around a curve in a narrow road restricted by parked cars on both sides. You can’t see beyond the curve and the vehicle in front. Their brakelights come on and they move into a gap. This will immediately suggest they are giving way to an oncoming vehicle. Now if you are too close, you may have nowhere to go. The space may not be big enough for both of you to give way. If, as I stated previously you left a bigger space between you and the car in front, you have a better opportunity to tuck into an earlier gap allowing the oncoming vehicle(s) to pass before proceeding ahead.
Another indicator apart from the courtesy of signals includes positioning. A car steering to the side of the road and brakelights coming on suggests parking. Swinging wide and sharp turn left suggests turning into a narrow access (to square up to it). Moving towards the centre of the road and slowing might indicate a right turn.
It really is a question of concentrating at all times and not being surprised. You can learn a lot just by watching and anticipating, thereby avoiding trouble ahead.
Continuing with the theme of communication, drivers are not totally reliant on signals – and just as well, with so many ignoring the basic courtesy of letting others know their intentions.
Brake lights inform the following vehicles you are slowing down, or could it be you are too close to the car in front and have to keep braking as an overreaction to closing in on the car ahead of you. An automatic vehicle requires more use of the brakes, as there is less control. The driver is unable to use engine braking to slow the car down. By coming off the gas in a manual car the gearbox will hold the car back, but this is less so in an automatic and I was surprised to find the life of the front brakes was reduced by 50% comparing automatic to manual. The automatic will eventually slow without gas being applied (not travelling downhill though), but braking will be the more likely way of holding the car back. Watch out for the driver continually applying the footbrake. This is somebody who is not planning ahead, is an anxious driver and possibly elderly with limited concentration.
Whether it’s manual or automatic, leave space between you and the vehicle in front, especially following a larger vehicle because your view ahead is blocked and you cannot see what is developing ahead. Leaving space does make driving safer. You can plan further ahead and have plenty of time to respond to an ever-changing situation. And if a car takes the space, so what, hold back and recreate the same following distance. What have you lost? In fact, if they were an aggressive driver I would rather have them in front than following too close behind.
Leaving space can allow vehicles to emerge from sideroads, thus helping them and the general flow of traffic. What's wrong with that? I like helping others out and it could be me in a sideroad in the future waiting to join the main traffic flow. Seeing it from both points of view can reduce selfish driving. Don't let too many out though, you will upset the driver behind you!
Oncoming vehicles can’t see your brakelights (obviously), but speed and position is the key to your and their intentions. A vehicle approaching a left or right turn without slowing is unlikely to be turning, whereas a slowing vehicle probably is, so you can anticipate a situation without the added information of indicators.
Brakelights from the vehicle in front can help in a meeting situation. Imagine you are following a car around a curve in a narrow road restricted by parked cars on both sides. You can’t see beyond the curve and the vehicle in front. Their brakelights come on and they move into a gap. This will immediately suggest they are giving way to an oncoming vehicle. Now if you are too close, you may have nowhere to go. The space may not be big enough for both of you to give way. If, as I stated previously you left a bigger space between you and the car in front, you have a better opportunity to tuck into an earlier gap allowing the oncoming vehicle(s) to pass before proceeding ahead.
Another indicator apart from the courtesy of signals includes positioning. A car steering to the side of the road and brakelights coming on suggests parking. Swinging wide and sharp turn left suggests turning into a narrow access (to square up to it). Moving towards the centre of the road and slowing might indicate a right turn.
It really is a question of concentrating at all times and not being surprised. You can learn a lot just by watching and anticipating, thereby avoiding trouble ahead.
Friday, 8 April 2011
Signalling (a lost courtesy)
How many ways are there to communicate with other road users? Signals are the obvious start. Sadly very much lacking on today’s roads. The whole point of a signal is to advise others where you are going and should be timed to avoid confusion. Signalling too early could suggest turning earlier and a driver could pull out from a side road into your path. Signalling late isn’t going to help anybody and other drivers may have assumed you were going straight ahead.
If you are turning into the second of two roads close to each other then delay the signal just enough to show you are not taking the first turning. Moving around parked cars shouldn’t require a signal generally speaking, but if you are passing a bus at a bus stop then the driver will need to know as he/she may be preparing to move away. It does of course warn oncoming drivers you could be encroaching onto their side of the road and it tells the following drivers as well. This applies to any large vehicle where your movement is exaggerated, but passing parked cars shouldn’t require a warning unless they are badly parked or there is somebody in the vehicle (brake lights are on).
The worst example of incorrect signalling or no signal at all is at roundabouts. Drivers either do not know the correct procedure (and let’s assume they have passed a driving test) or are totally lacking in any consideration for other road users. Just simply forgetting is no excuse either.
It’s quite straightforward really. If you are taking the first exit left you signal left on approach. Any exit to the right – signal right (signalling left as you pass the turning before your one). If your exit is directly ahead or intermediate (second left for example) – no signal until you are passing the exit before your one. On mini roundabouts no exit signal unless you have time, by the time you’re on the roundabout, you’re off of it!
If you are turning into the second of two roads close to each other then delay the signal just enough to show you are not taking the first turning. Moving around parked cars shouldn’t require a signal generally speaking, but if you are passing a bus at a bus stop then the driver will need to know as he/she may be preparing to move away. It does of course warn oncoming drivers you could be encroaching onto their side of the road and it tells the following drivers as well. This applies to any large vehicle where your movement is exaggerated, but passing parked cars shouldn’t require a warning unless they are badly parked or there is somebody in the vehicle (brake lights are on).
The worst example of incorrect signalling or no signal at all is at roundabouts. Drivers either do not know the correct procedure (and let’s assume they have passed a driving test) or are totally lacking in any consideration for other road users. Just simply forgetting is no excuse either.
It’s quite straightforward really. If you are taking the first exit left you signal left on approach. Any exit to the right – signal right (signalling left as you pass the turning before your one). If your exit is directly ahead or intermediate (second left for example) – no signal until you are passing the exit before your one. On mini roundabouts no exit signal unless you have time, by the time you’re on the roundabout, you’re off of it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
