[s-cars] Re: driving ability vs ABS, ESC, etc

[QSHIPQ at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/13/2003 1:14:03 PM Central Standard Time,
thecyberpoet at cyberpoet.net writes:


>I am going to try to refocus this discussion/debate back on
>the original premise: Newly licensed drivers in the USA
>receive insufficient training as a rule, and are not tested
>nor otherwise required to learn how to handle crisis
>situations as a part of their licensing process. The modern
>safety systems helps offset that lack of training, but should
>not be considered as the is-all and end-all of the situation.

Newly trained drivers aren't the problem, nor is their education IMO.
Blanket statement Marc, and it lacks credence.  Kinda like getting basic
flight instruction before becoming a stunt pilot.  You have basics in
advanced training that require knowlege and experience first.  You can add
crisis training ANYTIME in the driving process.  As a rule, it's better
assimilated when the NEED for it is better understood.  Safety systems aren't
the end all, but a good start.  I disagree that initial training should
include crisis training.  How about education of car control.

>Given a lack of ABS, can I retain directional control while
>braking by modulating the brake pressure? Yes.

Your street car equipment compromises don't make you that good all the time.
No one is that good.  Period.

>Do I know
>how to reduce my stopping distance without ABS by
>preventing lock-up of the wheels? Yes.

If a car has ABS, it's braked differently in a crisis/maximum situation than
one without.  This argument created a huge re-education of police departments
by chevrolet when ABS was added to impalas.  All those tricks you learned,
just don't work as effectively on ABS equipped cars.  So, do we teach newbies
how the "old school works" or do we teach the newbies how to be effective
drivers in the context of what they will be driving (hardware/software).
Hmmm.

>Can I judge whether
>reducing my braking pressure to permit me to slalom into a
>different lane or location rather than strictly using
>maximum pressure will provide me a better solution to the
>situation? Yes.

ALL the time?  I don't think so.  ABS allows maximum braking effectiveness
and control to be retained with less training.  Specifically, less skill.
Bad?

>>The original point was how many beginning American
>>drivers had to learn these methodologies as a part of their
>>obtaining a license, and how many were tested on it as part
>>of the process of obtaining the license?

Beginning drivers have to start somewhere.  Give them experience, any
responsible parent can give them the specific training opportunities for more
when it will make a difference.  Your original point is lost, because you are
trying to teach hi performance driving techniques to inexperienced drivers.
ABS requires less skill in a crisis situation, that's good for newbies, not
bad.

> You
> might
> have awareness advantage, but not hardware/software.

>>That presumes that I am not using ABS, and that ABS by
>>definition provides a larger advantage than training,
>>awareness and avoidance in most situations. The first
>>presumption is patently false; the second I believe to also
>>be false -- ABS increases the typical driver's capability
>>(a given), but new American drivers these days are not
>>trained or tested on what to do without it's presence as
>>part of their licensing procedures.

See above, you are thinking old school here Marc.  ABS requires the training
be on an abs vehicle.  It should be since 90+% of all vehicles now have some
sort of ABS.  All manufacturers now have no option for ABS delete.  Why are
you advocating that someone learn non ABS driving techniques on a car with
ABS?  In a crisis situation, I'd want the kid trained to react to the
situation with the hardware and software he's got, not what he doesn''t.
What good is that?

>>Good training increases awareness, increases your lead time on
>>such decisions, but it also increases reactive options -- choices
>>other than simply braking at maximum deceleration in a straight line.

With ABS that can be taught.  Put another way, you don't have to do any
training in the braking component, since a lead foot stomp will yield the
same (or better) result than any manual modulation.  Stamp the brake, look
for something smaller/softer than you.  Sounds pretty simple to me.

>>When examining the skid, a non-ABS equipped vehicle will
>>leave either a solid patch of rubber, or one that has
>>irregular gaps (from wheel hop). ABS-equipped vehicles in
>>the same situation leave a patch that has approximately a
>>1/4 to 1/2 inch gap (more for higher speeds) each 6 to 18
>>inches (whatever the interval, it remains virtually
>>constant from gap to gap, except for the change in speed).

I think that's the biggest hogwash I've ever read, sorry Marc.  I can see ABS
being a problem on massive weight variance vehicles (like empty vs laden big
rigs).  I don't at all see what you describe above (maybe 1970's car abs) on
any street car (geez, even GM's grandam has better abs than that).  If ABS is
impending lockup by definition, then you aren't locking the brake, if you
aren't locking the brake, how does it give a skid.  Maybe Keith can take you
up on this issue.  You've completely lost me in concept and vision.

>>That pattern is very repetitive and can easily be
>>discerned; it occurs at a frequency that is humanly
>>impossible to mimic without ABS because the human nervous
>>system can't modulate at the pressure at the same speed.

This is a basic misunderstanding of ABS and traction.  I encourage you to get
some of the algorithums, and listen to what Keith might say on the subject.
I'm incredulous that anyone would think this way of any modern automotive ABS
application.

>>But that exactly it. You are equating your gym teacher (who
>>side-lined as your driver's ed teacher) with the type of
>>training that can be provided. And that driving around the
>>school parking lot with the occasional end-of-semester
>>foray into the real world as the same as the best initial
>>training that can be provided (for those on the American
>>roads who even had the benefit of high school Driver's Ed).

It's what we have.  Is it a problem?  I don't think so.  Are better solutions
available.  Sure.  Then advocate that parents share the responsibilty of
educating their youth.  Don't give that to anyone but those that specialize
in that training.  For C/E situations, you don't want that specialist giving
baseline drivers ed.  This is a system that's in place and available to
anyone that feels it's importance.

>>As an actual former instructor, we train for the worst
>>possible combinations, in bad conditions (mandatorily as
>>part of the training), emphasizing the avoidance and
>>ability to correctly judge options before they result in
>>placement within a crisis situation -- AND what to do when
>>you end up in that situation (which is something that the
>>American driver's ed course I took at my high school didn't
>>cover in any detail).

Scan, Identify, Predict, Decide and Execute.  I went on the driving
simulators in 1975, with movies, including ones with cars pulling out, kids
running after the ball, etc.   That was 25years ago.  I'm not with you, e
xcept maybe your defiinition of "detail".

All levels of training is available, prereq?  Driver license.  Mandatory
before?  That's a huge jump Marc, and the logistics and implementation seems
"overwhelming".  How about a simpler system of advanced education credits
tied to insurance rate reduction.  Seems much more reasonable in expectation
and execution, and eliminates the need to revamp a million drivers ed
programs that do an adequate job of education.  I don't want the physed
teacher, or even the basic skills teacher spending time on advanced
techniques.  There's places for that, and a time....

>>The majority of my training time these days are spent with new
>>motorcycle riders teaching
>>them techniques to advance their skill set enough to hopefully keep
>>them alive and healthy,
>>but your suggestion is a good one, and I'll look into it with serious
>>consideration.

I'm all for opinions if you take them to an advocacy and solution
orientation.  I don't/can't agree that what we need is better drivers
education at the newbie level.  I will agree that advance drivers education
can benefit a newer and older driver, and advocate that parents and their
kids see this as beneficial to themselves and their loved ones.  To advocate
that further, putting money into the insurance companies that recognize that
advanced training reduces claims.  There are several that already do that (I
remember Dominos pizza delivery guys got it).

>>Thank you for the invitation. If you're going to Nuremberg, perhaps we
>>will see each other
>>there.

BTDT, too many turns for me to feel safe at the time, or maybe it was more
the folks that had all the experience....  BTW, in your fwd "understeer"
scenario, you can have lift throttle oversteer, but if weight shift is
significant enough, you can have lift throttle understeer as well (weight
shift forward overloads the tractive abilities of the front tires in a turn).

Scott Justusson