Defensive Driver Training dangerous??

[wulos]

A LEADING road safety researcher has declared defensive driver training for young motorists a dangerous and outdated practice, as statistics show younger drivers are over-represented in fatal accidents.

INTERESTING ARTICLE in todays Sydney Morning Herald.

Claims are that

''Teaching on-road crash avoidance skills involving braking and swerving is outmoded and we know it increases subsequent risky driving and subsequent crash involvement,''

and

there was no evidence to prove driver training helped young drivers become safer.

further to this

''I would love to see a court case where a provider of 'practical crash avoidance skills' is sued for teaching obsolete and dangerous practices.

Please read the entire article prior to replying. Some rather strong comments and ideas in the article. Surely any form of increasing awareness of the risks in a 'controlled' environment, rather then out on the streets is a good thing.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

[My poor XF]

He has a point regarding the recognition and perception of hazards etc, but I would think the ability to recover from a loss of control or the successful negotiation of low traction situations is just as critical. Sometimes these things can happen without any warning (oil on road at night in the wet for example.)

None of these skills are taught during the licencing process.

[Peuty]

The Government has forever derided these courses. They don't want to make them compulsory because they don't want to assist with funds.

I didn't read the article wulos posted, but is the researcher from Monash?

[SB076]

Have to agree with Mark Skaife - training in my opinion has to benefit the driver - lot of kids are being taught to drive by their parents who cant drive themselves.

I did driver training and I found it beneficial. In my experience it increased the gap between me and the car in front and it also made me more aware of other drivers and to try to allow for their mistakes.

[EDManual]

I think everyone should get on a motorbike to see how things really are, how you have to concentrate etc!, then take those notes to driving cars.

[Uncle Niceguy]

mmm i remember when i did my course back in 2009 and it wasn't just driving skills you learned but alot of smaller things like special glasses the replicate what you see when drunk, high on drugs and under heavy medication. i thought it was a very beneficial thing and did it as it was a christmas gift from the parents, and its probably one of the best things i have ever recieved. it was also quite handy as the car i first bought didn't have ABS and i learned to drive with ABS.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by Mr.NiceGuy

mmm i remember when i did my course back in 2009 and it wasn't just driving skills you learned but alot of smaller things like special glasses the replicate what you see when drunk, high on drugs and under heavy medication. i thought it was a very beneficial thing and did it as it was a christmas gift from the parents, and its probably one of the best things i have ever recieved. it was also quite handy as the car i first bought didn't have ABS and i learned to drive with ABS.

where can i get these glasses...

will they work on ugly chicks....

[Uncle Niceguy]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

where can i get these glasses...

will they work on ugly chicks....

haha i'm not sure mabye ask the company where they get them from and yes they make alot of ugly things look awesome.

[Streets]

Can't really think of anything that hasn't already been addressed in the article and the comments in this thread (of course I support defensive driving and other driver training courses). What I'd like to hear is this bloke's solution for teaching drivers how to avoid and respond to emergency situations. What does he want us to do, just put our hands over our eyes and hope for the best?

[Jim Goose]

How on earth can this guy make such comments?

Yes young people under 25yrs of age represent a great number of fatal and serious crashes, but has a "study" been under taken to see if those involved in these crashes ACTUALLY did a defensive driving course?

There is no evidence to prove that do defence driving course makes you takes greater risks.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Peuty

I didn't read the article wulos posted, but is the researcher from Monash?

RTA, he's involved in development of the present driver testing programme. The woefully inadequate testing programme...

[dylancox]

Speaking of driver training.. can one do the same advanced driver training programme that police use? Or better still something like what a bodyguard would do?

[04redxr8]

Maybe they are over presented because they lack the proper training?

[Trevor 57]

This 'researcher' is quoting one form of defensive driver training, and I for one have been vocal on here about the same practices, they just don't work, in fact for those that have read my previous posts will remember me saying that 'skid pan/race track' type defensive driver training does increase accidents, many multi-nationals have moved away from sort of training for that reason.

What we do need to teach is the knowledge of how to recognise a developing situation of risk hazard and the safe driving skills to avoid or minimise that.

is what i been sprouting on here for years.

Pffft, when did mark Skaife last spend hours training yourng drivers both on race tracks and out in the real world, the man lacks big heaps of credibility in this area. Just grab a mic Mark and you will feel better.

[wulos]

Nowhere is it clear as to what 'specific form of defensive driver training the "researcher" is talking about(apart from "Teaching on-road crash avoidance skills involving braking and swerving") It is all but IMPOSSIBLE to tell people in a sterile classroom, that it takes 'x' metres to stop vehicle 'y' traveling at 'z' kph, on a particular road surface, in a particular set of circumstances, and expect them to 'adjust their attitude' based solely upon a blackboard lesson.
Look at ANY form of high risk work environment(and yes, I would liken driving to a high risk occupation). All employees that work in these environments are required(often by law) to undergo real world, high stress scenario training, in order to maintain their accreditation levels. You don't pass the course, you don't maintain your accreditation, you don't get to work in that field. These scenarios may involve high pressure scenarios, that serve to provide a level of 'stress innoculation' which can help maintain calm when the situations most demand of it. Reasoning that education is a primary cause of these accidents to me seems quite backwards.
I am not saying that vehicle handling in an emergency situation is the only cure, but denying it has a part to play in driver education, is questionable to say the least.
Take a look on any given road, on any given day, in any given driving conditions, and it is plain to see that the current system is not even close to working. LESS education is never going to improve the road toll. The more you are educated as to the skills / risks involved, the more likely roadusers are to adjust their behaviours.
Punishing drivers hasn't worked - perhaps education, and enlightenment may??

Trev - Don't read this the wrong way.
You claim that many multi-nationals have moved away from sort of training? I am curious to know what you meant by this? multi national P platers? multi-national driver training centres?(I was not aware of there being any multi nationals offering practical driver education?)

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by wulos

Nowhere is it clear as to what 'specific form of defensive driver training the "researcher" is talking about(apart from "Teaching on-road crash avoidance skills involving braking and swerving") It is all but IMPOSSIBLE to tell people in a sterile classroom, that it takes 'x' metres to stop vehicle 'y' traveling at 'z' kph, on a particular road surface, in a particular set of circumstances, and expect them to 'adjust their attitude' based solely upon a blackboard lesson.
Take a look on any given road, on any given day, in any given driving conditions, and it is plain to see that the current system is not even close to working.

The researcher is talking about courses like the AAMI Skilled Driver courses, Courses like the Ian Luff/John Bowe, etc, etc, type race track driver training, where the trainers put a lot of emphasis on accident / skid avoidance, swerving through witches hats etc, this is the training that is not recomended by reputable fair dinkum driver training companies.

Reputable fair dinkum driver training companies take people out into real traffic situations and train drivers on observation skills (this includes mirror checks, training people to read the real life traiffic conditions), planning, keeping a safe space around them selves, etc.

Reputable fair dinkum driver training companies train drivers to not get into a skid / swerve situation because they have been reading the traffic, road, etc and know and plan for what is going on, think about fog, rain, wet roads, gravel roads, road works, the list goes on. Training people to not get into skid / swerve situations rather than teaching them to react when they do, start with the basics.

It does work, I have spent since 1987 training drivers at all levels on these skills and knowledge, drivers of multi-combinations, semi's, emergency service people, ordinary company car drivers, P Plater and Learners.

Originally Posted by wulos

Trev - Don't read this the wrong way.
You claim that many multi-nationals have moved away from sort of training? I am curious to know what you meant by this? multi national P platers? multi-national driver training centres?(I was not aware of there being any multi nationals offering practical driver education?)

Multi-national businesses who have in the past and currently still do invest in driver training for their company car drivers, companies like Shell, Orica, etc.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

This 'researcher' is quoting one form of defensive driver training, and I for one have been vocal on here about the same practices, they just don't work, in fact for those that have read my previous posts will remember me saying that 'skid pan/race track' type defensive driver training does increase accidents, many multi-nationals have moved away from sort of training for that reason.

is what i been sprouting on here for years.

Pffft, when did mark Skaife last spend hours training yourng drivers both on race tracks and out in the real world, the man lacks big heaps of credibility in this area. Just grab a mic Mark and you will feel better.

The defensive driver training I undertook did involve some skid pan work, but it represented a very small amount of the content taught and demostrated.

My experience is that I did see a lot of my mates get taught how to drive by their parents - who in my opinion were lucky to have a license in the first place. My mates got licenses (it wasnt that hard drive around Dandenong for 10 minutes at 10k's below the speed limit and use your indicators that was basically it) Some of these guys were later involved in accidents (thankfully no fatalaties that I am aware of) However I think some form of basic defensive training would have reduced the risks they posed on the roads.

[GreenMachine]

Small bit of anecdotal evidence. I manage a team of four twenty-somethings. In the 4 weeks after we sent them on defensive driver training, there were three accidents - One person turned right in to another car from the left hand lane. That wrote off one Commodore. We gave him another one, and he swerved it in to a pylon in a shopping centre "defensively" avoiding someone coming the other way. Another person got T-boned by someone running a red light in a big, good-visibility intersection.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by SB076

The defensive driver training I undertook did involve some skid pan work, but I was say it represented a very small amount of the content taught and demostrated.

many of the reputable fair dinkum driver training companies will add a small skid pan component if people wish, but they know it is just a carrot to get people in the door, the company I used worked for did exactly that

Originally Posted by SB076

My experience is that I did see a lot of my mates get taught how to drive by their parents - who in my opinion were lucky to have a license in the first place. My mates got licenses (it wasnt that hard drive around Dandenong for 10 minutes at 10k's below the speed limit and use your indicators that was basically it) Some of these guys were later involved in accidents (thankfully no fatalaties that I am aware of) However I think some form of basic defensive training would have reduced the risks they posed on the roads.

I agree 100%, the licenceing standards in Australia are way below where they need to be. I used to do H.V. licence testing with a private provider contracted to Vicroads, so I know exactly what the standards are and they are far too low, but we HAD to test to Vicroads standards and we were audited by Vicroads to ensure we did.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Small bit of anecdotal evidence. I manage a team of four twenty-somethings. In the 4 weeks after we sent them on defensive driver training, there were three accidents - One person turned right in to another car from the left hand lane. That wrote off one Commodore. We gave him another one, and he swerved it in to a pylon in a shopping centre "defensively" avoiding someone coming the other way. Another person got T-boned by someone running a red light in a big, good-visibility intersection.

who did the training, PM if you want.

What you are saying does not surprise me and supports what the 'reasearcher' said, not what Mark Skaife said.

[Peuty]

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Small bit of anecdotal evidence. I manage a team of four twenty-somethings. In the 4 weeks after we sent them on defensive driver training, there were three accidents - One person turned right in to another car from the left hand lane. That wrote off one Commodore. We gave him another one, and he swerved it in to a pylon in a shopping centre "defensively" avoiding someone coming the other way. Another person got T-boned by someone running a red light in a big, good-visibility intersection.

Originally Posted by Big Trev

who did the training, PM if you want.

What you are saying does not surprise me and supports what the 'reasearcher' said, not what Mark Skaife said.

Those accidents were caused by stupidity, and besides, no amount of training is going to stop other people running red lights.

And having a prang at a shopping centre? Come on Big Trev, I think your being unreasonable - you've been in the game, you should know that sometimes you just can't train the stupid out of someone.

[MAD]

I did the JB course, and I don't remember ever getting out on a skid pan, or practising hanging it out sideways. Sure you could be an idiot if you felt like it, but the instructors weren't happy about it.

It was about car control under emergency situations. Sure it's not everything, but all the other stuff (hazard perception, wathcing mirrors, etc) should be part of the license test. I thought it was?

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Peuty

Come on Big Trev, I think your being unreasonable - you've been in the game, you should know that sometimes you just can't train the stupid out of someone.

Absolutely, but these people are a very small minority, everyone will learn new things given the right encouragement, reasons and willingness to learn, you do it every day.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by MAD

It was about car control under emergency situations. Sure it's not everything, but all the other stuff (hazard perception, wathcing mirrors, etc) should be part of the license test. I thought it was?

If everyone and I mean everyone, including you drove like they did on ther licence test and did it everyday without fail then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Do you remember ALL the things that were taught to you to pass the test?

[2011G6E]

When i learned t drive a train, it was an intensive three month plus course, with tests every week with a minimum 90% pass rate. Then when i finally got it on track, I was with my tutor for a period that could extend to two years (just under twelve months in my case) before being signed off as competant after a rigorous examination of our skills.

This is for an admittedly large heavy vehicle, but it's not going anywhere...it's not like you have to steer it anywhere, and its more about situational awareness than anything else.

Why are we told for car licences that kids don't need professional training, and just let mum and dad and their questionable skills do it all?


Make it like Finland...a damn long and hard process to get a licence. Make it like train drivers where we have to virtually Re-sit our licence test every eighteen months completely to prove we still have the skills to do what we do...if safety is paramount, then what is wrong with making t harder for people to get a licence?

[Peuty]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Absolutely, but these people are a very small minority, everyone will learn new things given the right encouragement, reasons and willingness to learn, you do it every day.

But if someone doesn't want to learn, how are you going to get the message across? I think it's fair to say that if a person treats driving a car as simply a mode of transport, nothing else, why would they want to hone their skills? If the car starts each morning, their technical involvement stops there.

It's probably a case of the enthusiasts having to be trained to avoid the non enthusiasts when out on the road!

[wulos]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

The researcher is talking about courses like the AAMI Skilled Driver courses, Courses like the Ian Luff/John Bowe, etc, etc, type race track driver training, where the trainers put a lot of emphasis on accident / skid avoidance, swerving through witches hats etc, this is the training that is not recomended by reputable fair dinkum driver training companies.

Having recently attended a Driver training course, similar to the ones you talk about here - I can quite strongly say that the main emphasis is NOT about swerving through witches hats, or seeing how much smoke you can generate off the tyres(doing so would have resulted in immediate expulsion from the course(s))
Obviously the syllabus varies from one course to another. From those that I have done, there is emphasis on risk analysis(following distances, correct car maintenance / tyre pressures / seating position / seat belt positioning / mirror positioning /cargo stowage etc) as well as increasing your vision skills. Interestingly there was also a component on reversing a vehicle through the witches hats. I say interesting as there were a few in the course that had "limited" skills once the car was going backwards, relying on things like reverse sensors to "save them"
It was also interesting how many people had no real idea as to how modern braking systems work, or what to expect / be aware of when they are activated.
Denying that accidents / crashes / loss of traction occurs, or telling people that they should never have gotten into that situation in the first place is never going to help. If worse comes to worst, & it becomes a split second, life or death decision, training (even that small car handling component of these training courses you're oppsed to) may one day save a life.

[burnz]

sound like a lot of the naysayer were born at 30, and never did silly things in their teens..

over represented indeed..

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by burnz

sound like a lot of the naysayer were born at 30, and never did silly things in their teens..

over represented indeed..

No, Ijust survived, many of mate didn't, the 70's when I got my licence the Victorian road toll was over 1000, now it is 280

Originally Posted by Peuty

But if someone doesn't want to learn, how are you going to get the message across? I think it's fair to say that if a person treats driving a car as simply a mode of transport, nothing else, why would they want to hone their skills? If the car starts each morning, their technical involvement stops there.

and there are plenty like that, my opinion is that they have just never been trained properly to start with, many of the hundreds of people I have trained over the years have an "oh shyte" moment when doing their training, I got the penny to drop, suffice to say they are much better drivers after-wards.

Originally Posted by wulos

Denying that accidents / crashes / loss of traction occurs, or telling people that they should never have gotten into that situation in the first place is never going to help. If worse comes to worst, & it becomes a split second, life or death decision, training (even that small car handling component of these training courses you're oppsed to) may one day save a life.

Not putting your-self in dangerous positions takes some split second thinking as well, it does not come as 2nd nature, people need to think about driving their cars when they are driving their cars, next time you drive pay particular attention to how much time you actutually spend thinking about the driving task, it isn't that much, suffice to say that if you thinking about thinking about it, then you are on the right path.

Too many think about everything else EXCEPT the act of driving the car.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Do you remember ALL the things that were taught to you to pass the test?

I learned how to drive, that's how I passed my test.

I reckon I could recall almost anything I learned during my learners and anything required to pass the test. The only reason I had lessons was because we didn't have manual car for me to learn in.