The DSA has sent out a reminder about overtaking on the hard shoulder on motorways:
Motorways
Overtaking
You MUST NOT use the hard shoulder for overtaking.
In areas where an Active Traffic Management (ATM) Scheme is in force, the hard shoulder may be used as a running lane. You will know when you can use this because a speed limit sign will be shown above all open lanes, including the hard shoulder. A red cross or blank sign above the hard shoulder means that you MUST NOT drive on the hard shoulder except in an emergency or breakdown. Emergency refuge areas have also been built into these areas for use in cases of emergency or breakdown.
The latest issue of Despatch has an interesting lead article about CPD – that’s continuing professional development, where ADIs are supposed to continue their professional training and development in their own time. CPD has been a buzzword among the unwashed masses for a few years now.
In a nutshell, the DSA has announced that it will NOT make CPD compulsory for the time being. There are a number of interesting threads of thought which lead off from this.
I’m in favour of CPD in general, but 99.9% of what “CPD” courses are (or have been) available out there are useless crap! CPD has been devalued by organisations handing out “CPD certificates” like confetti to people for just turning up to regular meetings, where the only item on the agenda is to have a moan about the DSA and discuss how it could be brought down.
I can assure you that that’s not CPD, anymore than Monopoly money is real money!
Anyway, one interesting thought which occurred to me is how much money some people will have wasted paying for this pointless “CPD” in the past. After all, now that it’s not going to be compulsory – no brownie points, no gold stars, no marks out of ten on the check test – all those meetings or lectures on how to do your tax return by people with no qualifications in the subject matter involved, even though you use an accountant, have effectively been made useless.
Another interesting point is how already the very same people who would have slammed the DSA if CPD had been made compulsory are now criticising them because it hasn’t been! These are the kind of people who would have been first in the queue for those “bring down the DSA” meetings in local pubs, and who are always prattling on about the same subject ad nauseam across various web forums.
I also wonder what some of the larger organisations and franchises will do now? Many have issued “CPD certificates” to their members for attending all sorts of meetings and events. A lot of ADIs have been stupid enough to let pupils down in order to attend these things, but it’s all been devalued – even if those certificates had any value to start with.
I always said that until the DSA issued a list of approved courses I wasn’t going to waste my time attending any that cost me money if there wasn’t a decent qualification at the end of it (and I don’t mean like a BTEC (or any similar vocational qualification), which are impossible to fail and aren’t worth the paper they’re written on).
I wonder if those meetings of the right-on brothers in pubs in Northern towns, bitching about the DSA and looking for ways to criticise it for everything, will still go ahead now?
The latest edition of Despatch (October 2012) is now available for download from the DSA. This month sees articles on voluntary (not compulsory) CPD, marketing advice, information about the new DSA logo, and some odds and ends.
Well, it looks like PCS has got all its comrades back off holiday now, and has rearranged the strike that was originally scheduled for 13 September. It is now due to take place on 21 September 2012.
The DSA has sent out an alert.
Candidates are urged to attend as normal, since not all examiners are members of the union – and of those stupid enough to be so, not all of them are that stupid that they participate in strike action.
Questions used to find the blog:
I’ve got a test that day. Why can’t the DSA just tell me whether they’re working or not?
Look, the whole point of strikes is to cause problems in order to try and get your own childish way. The DSA is NOT calling the strike – PCS (the fossil union) is. Any blame for disruption lies entirely with the union.
The DSA does not know which examiners will be out on strike. The alerts they send out explain that clearly, and it is shocking that driving instructors are still incapable of understanding this simple fact even after so many strikes in the last couple of years alone. If the DSA automatically cancelled ALL tests for that day, the disruption would be thousands of times worse. All they can do is ask you to turn up.
If you don’t like it, take it up with PCS and the government. It isn’t the DSA’s fault in any way.
The Americans are going nuts at the moment as new laws banning texting are brought in. Every time a state introduces a law, everyone behaves as though they just discovered a diamond in a dog turd.
Over here, the use of mobile devices when driving has been illegal for some time. You’d think it would be straightforward: don’t mess about with things that you have to hold in your hand, which could distract you when driving. But no, because you always get the ADI who thinks he’s a legal expert who can find loopholes within loopholes, and who cleverly defines a mobile phone as distinct from, say, a tablet or laptop.
As far as the letter of the law is concerned, the handheld mobile devices regulations refer to anything which is capable of interactive communications (two-way handheld radios are exempt) – and by that, it means talking, texting, emailing, web browsing, or navigating (where data has to be sent and received).
It would be difficult to argue that a tablet or laptop – by virtue of having to be held – was exempt if the police pulled you over for it.
The question often arises out in ADI Land because the DVSA is currently trialling the use of tablets instead of the DL25 paper marking sheet for examiners. Obviously, the examiner is going to be using the device while the car is moving during a driving test.
The reason this is not an issue is that on the driving test, the candidate is NOT being supervised. The examiner is NOT in charge of the vehicle. He or she is NOT taking the place of the ADI on a normal lesson.
However, if an ADI – one of the ones, no doubt, who already owns a hi-vis jacket and clipboard so he can pretend to be an examiner on mock tests – were to start using a tablet or laptop while the engine is on, then he or she is using a handheld device while being in charge of the vehicle. It’s “handheld” because you have to hold it!
Even if we go beyond the handheld devices law, if the responsible driver (supervisor or otherwise) is distracted by fiddling with anything in the car – cigarette, sandwiches, drinks, satnav, radio, window, fog lights, whatever – and it can be shown that this resulted in an accident, then there are other laws (driving without due care, etc.) which can come into play if the police are impressed enough by what they see.
Trying to play the amateur lawyer and telling the police that they’re wrong is pretty much guaranteed to impress them enough to throw the book at you. And quite rightly so.
An instructor should be in control at all times. If something is likely to impair that control, then whether it is technically illegal or not is not the issue. It’s just wrong – good old common sense tells you that.
But my iPad doesn’t have 2G/3G/4G connectivity! Someone actually came out with this on one of the forums. See what I mean about ADIs thinking they’re clever?
The law refers to two-way communication or data transmission – it doesn’t say anything about the mobile phone network. An iPad that doesn’t have 2G/3G/4G would be pretty useless if it didn’t have some way of connecting to the internet. Hence, it WILL have wi-fi connectivity, and so it WILL be classed as a handheld device if you’re stopped. Of course, this would be orgasmic for many ADIs, as they would be able to dream of going to court and proving everyone (especially the police) wrong!
And even if you managed by some quirk of fate to win your case on that technicality there would be the small matter of driving without due care and attention. Yes, you might (just a tiny “might”) succeed in getting some judge to agree that the device you were holding in your hand and playing with was not included in the handheld devices regulations. But the simple fact you were doing it while you were supposed to be supervising your learner draws on older and much better established laws.
Is it really worth it? Just don’t use the bloody thing when you’re supervising a learner on normal lessons. You don’t need to… unless you’re a prat.
Note that this is an old article from 2012! I say that, because it’s been getting hits in mid-2019. All references to DSA are, of course, referring to DVSA in 2019. Also, in 2019 you might be asked to drive forwards into a bay, then reverse out again.
Obviously, not everyone in the world reads this blog, and they go on to various web forums to find the answers to problems they have with driving. Unfortunately, they get fed some utter crap as a result.
On one forum (frequented by student types) someone has asked how they would find their “bay parking reference point” in their own car. It’s a sensible enough question as long you accept that one way (there are others) of bay parking IS to use a reference point in the sense that they meant it.
Someone – who I believe is classed as an “advanced driver” – has responded:
DSA stupidly get you to approach away from the selected bay and then start the reverse from that position which is at 90% to the bay!!!!
This is complete bullshit – there is no “DSA way” – and this so-called “advanced driver” also refers to the “non-DSA way”. The DSA doesn’t care how you reverse into the bay as long as you’re in control and safe. Their DT1 document says:
AT THE START OF THE TEST
…They should be asked to drive out of the bay to the left or right (if both options are available in that car park) and stop with the wheels straight before reversing into any convenient bay and parking the car (examiners should not instruct candidates to park in the centre of the bay). The instruction is to prevent them reversing back, into the bay on the same lock.
Providing some attempt has been made to straighten the front wheels, examiners should not be concerned if the wheels are not completely straight. The candidate may elect to drive forward to adjust the angle at which they address the bay they intend to reverse into, or space permitting, they are allowed to drive forwards into one bay before reversing back in a straight line into the opposing bay.
AT THE END OF THE TEST
On the approach to the centre the candidate should be advised to turn into the car park and reverse into any convenient bay to park the car. The candidate can again make their own choice of bay and carry out the manoeuvre in the way that they choose, given the restrictions that may be imposed by the characteristics of the car park.
Nowhere does it say they have to be at 90 degrees to the bay they intend to reverse into. It’s the candidate’s choice how they do it – all they must do is drive out of the bay to the left or right (if they’re already in one) and straighten the wheels to prevent them cheating and just going back in along the path they took as they moved out. They can drive into bays on the opposite side if these are free, utilising whatever space is available – just as they would do in real life.
The total misinformation given by this guy will now be taken as gospel by those who have been unfortunate enough to read it. That’s how bad driving starts – with bad information. So it’s ironic that in this case it should come from a member of a group which has a far higher opinion of itself than the reality would indicate. It’s just a shame that the accuracy of its knowledge is severely corrupted by its feelings towards the DSA. There is NO “DSA way” to bay park.
It’s also worth noting that this same “advanced driver” – who is not an ADI – has been berated on several other forums for his often nonsensical advice.
The 90 degree method is often easier for people who find reversing difficult. And more importantly, since their they have just one chance to get it right on their driving test, it is often the most reproducible way. But it isn’t the only way, and candidates can choose whichever method suits them best.
To answer the original poster’s question…
How do I find the bay park reference point in my own car?
It’s quite easy. Find an empty or quiet car park and drive forwards into one of the middle bays (i.e. those not backed by kerbs or walls). Make sure you’re nicely centred.
Now, just do the manoeuvre in reverse. Drive forward very slowly until your shoulder is level with the end of the bay and stop. As you start moving again very slowly, get full lock on quickly and continue forward until you are at 90 degrees to the bays, straighten your wheels, then stop (or you could stop first, then straighten your wheels as you move again – it’s up to you). Finally, move forward about another 15cm/6 inches and stop.
You should now have a reference point with one of the adjacent lines that you can commit to memory.
You might need to tweak it a bit if your car control is initially a bit clumsy, but this is how to set the reference position if you use the 90 degree method. Then you need to practice the actual manoeuvre to get a consistent routine – it won’t work if you sometimes dry steer, sometimes lurch backward as you release the handbrake, sometimes roll forward or backward, and so on.
Reversing in from 90° confuses other drivers, doesn’t it?
No. In a busy car park, it is up to you to decide how to park. There will be occasions when you decide to drive straight into a bay head first – if someone is following close behind, for example. But don’t try and convince yourself that the 90° reverse method is any more inconvenient than the angled reverse. It isn’t.
If you see an empty bay and you intend to drive into it – forwards or backwards – signal your intention, and then position yourself accordingly.
The DSA has sent out an alert advising all test candidates to attend as normal for tests booked on 13th September 2012.
The PCS union – which, as you know, spends much of its time on display in the Natural History Museum in the Fossils section – has got yet another strike planned.
Once again, remember that not all examiners are backward enough to be in the union in the first place, and of those that are in it, not all of them are stupid enough to engage in strike action.
Attend your test and keep your fingers crossed. And remember that any inconvenience caused to you as a result of strike action is absolutely the fault of PCS and its participating members.
I updated an article a few days ago which explained the changes made at least a year ago to the DSA’s internal guidance document (DT1). I explained that they had added a paragraph telling their examiners that if a candidate “cross[ed] their hands” or “[didn’t hold] the wheel at ten to two or quarter to three” they should not be marked down with faults.
I explained that this was not a change, but an addition – a clarification for its own examiners.
I also think I explained clearly enough that Driving: The Essential Skills (TES) had never previously stated that using the pull-push method was the only acceptable way to steer, nor had it ever implied that you would fail your test if you steered in a different way. It simply presented the method as an ideal one – which, when you consider the vast majority of learners, it is.
The implication that you would fail your test for not using pull-push has previously been the domain of the instructor-who-thinks-he-knows-it-all (of which there are many), and the examiner who is doing his job wrong (of which there were very few, but a sufficient number nonetheless to keep the former group going with its misinformation).
So it was amusing to read – yet again – that TES has apparently “dropped all reference on how to steer” and the implication that DT1 has changed completely to suddenly allow other methods of steering. Neither TES or DT1 have done any such thing.
Let me state again that for as long as I can remember, not using the pull-push steering method on test has NOT been marked as a fault. There MAY have been some examiners (quite possibly failed instructors who jumped ship, and who carried the misinformation with them) who saw it as such, but THAT is what the DSA was addressing when it added clarification to its internal DT1 document. And the removal of pull-push as a recommended method in TES is a lamentable move, since many instructors appear to be interpreting it as a statement that you SHOULDN’T use pull-push in vindication of their pre-held negative views about anything the DSA “tells” them to do.
It’s possible that TES has been altered partly in readiness for the official introduction of “coaching” to driver training. Coaching – and the equivalent euphemism, “client centered learning” (CCL) – is misunderstood by most instructors, which obviously means they all consider themselves experts in the subject.
In actual fact – and as the DSA itself points out – CCL is “intended to build on your existing skills” should be “integrate[d] into your existing teaching”. It simply includes “new” subjects that provide the material for learners to drive safely and responsibly (e.g. issues surrounding driver fatigue and the use of alcohol or drugs). For some of us, I doubt that it will add too much that is genuinely new. The new syllabus is aimed at those who literally “only teach people to drive”
But going back to steering, I mentioned in the previously updated article that a good footballer can play “keepy-up” for hours on end – but he seldom has any cause to do it when he is playing a match. However, the skills required to play “keepy-up” are his bread and butter, and without them he would not be a player of a very high standard. Oh, he could thrash his way around the field, and use his muscles and brawn to pole-axe opponents, but that would simply be a mask to hide his lack of proper skill.
The same is true of steering. Being able to pull-push requires very specific coordination skills, and possessing those skills means you are in better overall control.
When I get absolute beginners, nearly all of them cannot steer at all to begin with. Initial attempts are met with us going very wide or too tight around bends and corners. When I explain pull-push, and get them to try it using my diary as a pretend steering wheel, many of them can’t initially get the hand movements synched. But once they get it – and I mean, just ONCE – they have the key and can apply it to their steering. It’s exactly like those wooden Chinese puzzles that you have to take apart and reassemble – initially, you don’t know what to do, but once you know the first move the rest follows.
I’m seeing a lot of the “experts” in CCL suggesting that when a new learner gets in the car they should be allowed to work out how to steer for themselves!
This is absolute rubbish. If you do that, the learner is likely to hit the kerb (and on either side of the road), veer towards other vehicles (parked or moving), or even towards pedestrians (including children). It is no wonder you get the chavvy boy-racers flinging their cars on to roundabouts, around bends, and everywhere else if they’ve had teachers like that.
The correct application of CCL in the case of steering would be to explain the basics maybe using pull-push as a model, make sure they can use pull-push at least haltingly by practising, and then allow a degree or two of freedom (hand-over-hand, one-handed, etc.) as longas acceptable control is maintained.
After all, you don’t teach children to swim by pushing them in at the deep end and standing back. It seems these CCL “experts” would do just that, though.
The DSA is urging all driving test candidates booked to take a test on the morning of Thursday 30 August to attend as usual, despite the potential for strike action by driving examiners who are members of the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union.
The DSA’s chief executive Rosemary Thew said:
“Not all examiners are members of the PCS union and even if they are, we can’t be sure that they’ll support the strike. So we’re asking candidates to come for their test as normal so it can go ahead if possible.
“We’re sorry for the inconvenience this will cause and will do everything we can to minimise disruption for our customers.”
Candidates who turn up but can’t take their tests because of strike action will not have to contact the DSA to rebook. They should hear from the agency with a new date within 5 to 10 working days.
Out-of-pocket expenses
If candidates fail to attend they won’t be able to claim out-of-pocket expenses if their tests are cancelled and they’ll need to rebook their own tests.
Theory tests are not affected and will be taking place as planned.
Rosemary Thew has said what I usually do about not all examiners getting involved. I would add that from what I can gather (i.e. previous strikes), the further north you travel the more likely they are to be burning effigies, chanting, and waving banners.
Keep your fingers crossed and turn up.
EDIT 25/8/2012: This came through in the feeds. The comment about how many test would be cancelled if ALL union members took action is interesting – and misleading.
When I first read it I thought “100 tests across England and Wales is nothing”. But then I realised that they are just talking about their local area (journalists who don’t understand the significance of the internet and who make stupid ambiguous comments like that should learn from their mistakes). The actual number nationwide would be quite significant – that “100” is across six test centres, and there are 300-400 test centres around the country.
That would equate to somewhere in the region of 5,000 tests on a pro rata basis, though obviously some centres have fewer examiners than the West Midlands ones, and as I said above not all examiners get involved.
a few years now.
lay “keepy-up” for hours on end – but he seldom has any cause to do it when he is playing a match. However, the skills required to play “keepy-up” are his bread and butter, and without them he would not be a player of a very high standard. Oh, he could thrash his way around the field, and use his muscles and brawn to pole-axe opponents, but that would simply be a mask to hide his lack of proper skill.