hi, thanks for the hazard perception commentary clip, very useful as I'm training to be an ADI, but I'm struggling with the hazard perception element of the theory test. Could you offer me any advice please? I am either clicking too early, so outside the scoring window, or am clicking late so only scoring 3's. I am very concious of clicking too many times as this discounts any score, and have made this mistake during practice. Is the scoring window open when the vehicle being used to film actually starts to make an adjustment? (either speed or direction). Thank you for any pointers.
Reply:
Oh I hate these computerised hazard perception tests, I feel they are so unreal and hard to operate - i have the same kind of trouble as you with the ones I have tried in the past!
One would like to think the scoring window is open even once the host vehicle has begun to deviate, but I suspect from what you say this is not the case (and you can see a certain logic in this, because it means you are now dealing with the hazard, not spotting it in advance).
My best advice would be to go over the system of hazard perception you are using - for example, are you keeping up the scanning; are you starting at the horizon and working forward and constantly re-adjusting the distance of your vision so that you are picking up things well in advance, far off. (This is one of the reasons I hate the computer systems, because you cannot see the detail in the distance. Nor can you adjust your position - both fundamental parts of good hazard perception.) nik
Traction Control is fitted on many modern cars, designed to help prevent and control skids and loss of traction. It may not however be your best friend in the snow.
The issue that you may face is that when the traction control detects slip at the wheels, it reduces the power to the wheel. (This can be by cutting power at the engine, or on more sophisticated systems by braking the slipping wheel).
On the whole this would seem to be a good thing - when setting off, for example, it reduces slip. If you accelerate it can also control slip. And if the car teeters sideways, then the correction at the wheels is intended to bring it back on track (and generally does. I once tried putting my Saab 93 Aero sideways in the snow using the handbrake - with ESP on I barely got more than 30 degrees out of kilter. With it turned off, I nearly totalled a road sign.)
So why is reduced power to the wheels a bad thing? One word: hills!
Trust me - this is the word of someone who has, in the past, become stranded on hill because he couldn't turn the traction control system off fast enough (a system limitation, I might add). You see, what happens as your car begins to climb a slippery hill is the drive wheels, not surprisingly, begin to slip - especially if the car is front-wheel drive. As they begin to slip the traction control system reduces power. But you're going uphill - so reduced power means you slow down. And if this process continues, before long you can be stationary. Then you might not get going again.
You might argue that the traction control detects loss of grip, and if there is no grip you can't get up the hill anyway. Well, it's not necessarily true. The traction control system is not able to perfectly measure the co-efficient of friction between the wheels and the snow and also has a necessary characteristic called hysteresis. In simple terms, it's only an approximation- it might not know, for example, that spinning the wheels to dig down through the surface snow might find grip underneath; it will never let you do this.
So, be warned. I don't recommend turning your traction control off in slippery conditions, but be ready to turn it off if you are approaching an upward hill. Check, too, that your car allows you to do this - some cars only allow it when they are below a certain speed. As ever, be prepared.
Pile-up as cow strays on motorway An escaped cow caused a five-car pile-up when it strayed on to a major motorway in West Lothian. Motorists and passengers escaped with minor injuries after the animal wandered onto the eastbound carriageway of the M9 near Winchburgh. As the first vehicle dodged the lost cow, it collided with another car - starting a five-car crash. Two fire engines were called to the scene at about 2130 BST on Tuesday. The cow died at the scene. Sgt David Gray, of Lothian and Borders Police, said: "The people had a pretty lucky escape. Unfortunately the animal did not."
This just goes to show what we all know and should repeat to ourselves when we get in the car: Always expect the unexpected.
Cows are reasonably large and slow moving objects (as a rule they don't suddenly materialise in your lane), so the fact this accident caused a five car pile up probably goes to highlight something we all know: drivers drive far too close on motorways and do not look far enough ahead.
New GPS research carried out in Taiwan suggests that drivers using in-car satellite navigation systems take less time to reach their destination, and they may drive more safely too.
One group of drivers were involved in the research each using in-car satellite navigation systems to reach a variety of urban and rural destinations they had never travelled to before. Another group of motorists were also asked to use paper maps to reach a similar set of mysterious destinations.
The Results
Satellite navigation assisted journeys were around 7 percent shorter in towns than map-guided ones, and 2 percent shorter on rural runs.
The researchers attached sensors to each car to track how often a driver made a course correction. The research found that map users changed course more times during a journey than satellite navigation users.
One of the researchers offered an explanation for these positive results, saying that a satellite navigation unit relieves the drivers' mental workload: "Sat-nav users could take to the road immediately without any additional mental workload other than initially loading the destination into the device." By contrast map users have to study street maps before they enter the car "And their mental workload continues throughout the journey".
How good is your hazard perception when driving? Would you like to test it from the safety of your armchair? What's it like giving commentary on the drive? These in-car videos should answer that and hopefully prove interesting and educational at the same time.
This is the first bit of video I shot properly with my latest camera setup (Aiptek DV8900) - a fairly short 4 to 5 mile drive from the supermarket. But what I realised when I watched it back was just how many hazards there were along the route when you counted them up. I find driving in supermarket car-parks and unfamiliar cities a little more pressure at the best of times, because the senses have to be heightened and the hazard risk is that much greater. The useful thing about this video was that I could actually count how thick and fast they came! And, indeed, it's thick and fast.
So - I thought i would produce two versions of this short video. One 'silent' one, which is just a video of the drive - you can watch this one and see how many hazards you spot. (By the way - this includes "potential hazards" too - i.e. elements of the unknown that are useful to anticipate and could develop into a real and present hazard). The best thing to do is sit with a blank piece of paper and make tally marks for every hazard you think you see - a hazard, of course, being something that poses or potentially poses a safety risk to you, your vehicle or someone else.
Obviously try to do that watching the video once only for the first time - otherwise you are kidding yourself that you see more than you really did!
Once you've done that - try the second video - this time I am providing a commentary on everything I see (although actually it's not absolutely everything, it's not possible to cram enough words in to describe everything)...
What do you think? Did you spot the same hazards as me? Did I miss any? How many did you get? Once you think you have an answer, you can scroll further down this page and compare scores...
Hazards in the video
This simple clip of video is perfect for just demonstrating how many hazards are thrown at a driver, even under fairly ordinary light traffic conditions. It goes to show just how much brain processing is required in order to drive truly safely - when you work out the number of hazards per second, the number is fairly staggering, and just goes to show how a momentary lapse of concentration while driving can provide to be a disaster.
Here are the statistics I calculated - you may disagree slightly with the numbers - but I'm fairly certain I can identify and justify each of these hazards - so if anything, these numbers could be higher.
1st Video segment (upto 40mph zone): length approx 2 minutes; no. of hazards 46; average hazard rate: 1 hazard per 2.6 seconds.
2nd Video segment (main road): length approx 2 minutes 30; no. of hazards 46 (co-incidence!); average hazard rate: 1 hazard per 3.2 seconds.
Overall Video: length 4 minutes 30; no. of hazards 92; average hazard rate: 1 hazard per 2.9 seconds.
These numbers are pretty remarkable - although i shouldn't be surprised, as I know full well that there are many many constant hazards while driving, and most people simple don't spot them. But if you've ever heard (or given) proper driving commentary, then you know it is just a constant stream of information and very difficult to actually fit enough words in to describe everything.
Anyway - I hope you found these clips enlightening.
ps. yes - i know I said "trolleys on the right" at the start of the video, when I meant "left". And yes, it was a bit cheeky to comment on the Police driver's driving... but I expect high standards :-)
We’ve all see them – cars with only one headlight, that can so easily be momentarily mistaken for a motorcycle. Well, they’re breeding and there’s a reason. It’s called technology! Yes, the more sophisticated and efficient car lighting has become, the more difficult it is to replace faulty bulbs and sealed light units. The basis of the problem seems to be a combination of evermore streamlined car bodies crammed with evermore technology, to the point where there’s only room for another penny washer under the bonnet and not the tools or even the hands required to replace a headlamp bulb. Apparently on some cars you have to remove the battery, disconnect air hoses or even take off the front bumper! By all accounts Halfords, who have offered a bulb fitting service for a small charge, now tell the owners of some vehicles to have the task carried out by their main dealer. This, of course, has serious cost implications and you have to hope they have mechanics with tiny fingers in tow, otherwise even they may struggle. Moreover, the problem is not confined to front lights. Whereas rear bulbs used to be readily accessible through the boot on most cars, many modern vehicles require entire lamp clusters to be removed first, often at the cost of torn seals and broken fixings. This makes a bit of a mockery of some country’s laws that require motorists to carry spare bulbs on the car. There seems little point if they won’t be able to fit them! This appears to be a problem the industry has created and one that only they can resolve. If so, the sooner it happens the better, as the resulting one-eyed monsters are a danger to us all. [source: IAM]
The revelations of a new road safety study from the charity Brake probably don't leave many of us surprised. They have found that young motorists are more likely than older people to take "extreme and life-threatening" risks while driving.
Brake found that 33% of the drivers aged 17-24 it surveyed admitted overtaking on a blind bend, compared to 9% of older drivers. Government transport statistics show more than 14 young drivers and their passengers die every week in Britain. The survey questioned 4,640 UK drivers, 533 of whom were aged between 17 and 24.
Video-equipped is a website that shares and discusses everything there is to know about advanced driving and advanced driving techniques. In the fullness of time we'll have news, views and reviews of all things 'driving'. The aim of the site is to share knowledge and promote increased skill and healthier attitudes in the average driving community - skills and attitudes which are sadly very much lacking.
