advanced training and coms use

[The Spin Doctor]

Was your acquaintance giving directions by indicators?

Yes. Went around a blind bend, on a road I didn't know, to be faced with another sharp bend, a junction on the left with a car edging out, oncoming traffic indicating right and a parked car somewhere in the mix. I stayed on the main road, and TBH looking in my mirror was way down my list of priorities. Apparently I should have turned left.

For the avoidance of doubt he wasn't signaling prior to the first bend, I looked.

That's just crap route planning.

Even if you WANT to put a trainee into a situation where some complex decisions are needed, if you're relying on someone to see your signal you are forcing them to make potentially extended looks in the mirror. I had to do an observed right not too long ago - with low sun ahead, the fairing mounted indicators on the bike behind were almost invisible. A couple of times I simply couldn't see if the indicator was on or not and just carried on. Eventually I pulled over and said "I simply can't see your signals because of the sun". He wasn't impressed.

Sometimes trainees have trouble understanding the radio but frankly, it's far less distracting to be given a 'pop splutter crackle' direction in the ear than the 'watch my signals' routine.

[Bigyin]

and 1 set to RX to listen so i know when my transmissions are cutting .

Blimey! That's dedication

I find it invaluable...... I was out today with 2 who had never been on the road before and 1 trainee managed to lose a PMR from his pocket. I saw it fall, stopped, picked up and caught up. I then realised that as i bent down i had somehow managed to turn off my Vox radio as nothing was coming out my RX one. I had managed to pull the mic connector from the radio. Doh. Instead of just blindly repeating myself wondering why the one with a functioning radio wasnt doing what i asked i knew neither could hear me so passed them both and pointed to them to follow me round a 3rd exit right RA to a safe pull in to fix it all.

Sorted all the radios out and off we went again

[The Spin Doctor]

I did use the spare radio in a pocket routine when we had to make do with the truly awful 59MHz baby alarms because around 50% of what we said didn't come over clearly, and most of the rest never got as far as the airwaves! Anyone who has used a PMR radio and thinks they are iffy really should try one of the old sets

TBH, the Bluetooth connection means the problem has almost gone away. If they drop out, I usually get a warning tone, and normally reconnect with a press of a button on the move. I do have the odd glitch with Bluetooth but if the trainee can't hear me it's likely it's their their end - either racket in the helmet, or their own hearing is poor.

And thus when the trainee doesn't react to a verbal communication over the radio, it's pretty obvious if they didn't hear anything - they just don't do anything but continue on their merry way "following the road ahead" as instructed - there's zero reaction. If they hear something but can't make it out they usually start looking in the mirror... plus there's the 'tap your helmet if you didn't hear' routine to fall back on.

[Horse]

... truly awful 59MHz baby alarms ... ! Anyone who has used a PMR radio and thinks they are iffy really should try one of the old sets

IRC we had other sets before them, with a range of 50m at best. Sonic?

[The Spin Doctor]

... truly awful 59MHz baby alarms ... ! Anyone who has used a PMR radio and thinks they are iffy really should try one of the old sets

IRC we had other sets before them, with a range of 50m at best. Sonic?

They were the 59MHz sets - it was the only legal frequency at the time.

As I said in another post, you could be standing next to the trainee and the radio wouldn't transmit that far.

Trying to manage five trainees on the road at the same time (one ahead, four behind) was a bloody nightmare. Mostly only the bike in front and the rider behind could hear instructions, for the rest it was simply follow the bike in front. Which was why I'd regularly stop before we did anything complex and explain helmets off so they could hear me.

I must have told the story about the day they sent me out with SIX trainees AND a trainee instructor!

[Bob D.]

The IAM long denied that they 'trained' riders although they now have an 'advanced course'. To my knowledge some observers use comms, most don't. AFAIK, the vast majority of independent post-test trainers like myself use comms.

This is consistent with my experience too. None of my four local groups use them (two IAM and two RoADAR groups). This is why I was surprised to read Tucker and Rainford advocating them as though it was standard practice (rather than something that seems to be viewed cautiously if not reluctantly). Expense may be the main reason why observers are reluctant to use them, however. Perhaps if they were professional rather than voluntary all the groups would use them? Personally, I would've thought they'd be brilliant. So many observers seem to spend time rejigging their routes for associates who've missed a signal.

I remember one IAM observer said coms use has to be handled extremely carefully because the observer cannot give "instructions" because of insurance issues. I tried to understand his points here but I struggled. Perhaps they're similar to the point you illuded to regarding the IAM's reticence to refer to themselves as 'trainers'? I.e. there's another level of liability that's incurred.

[Horse]

Expense

TVAM received a grant of some sort to buy several sets.

liability

They are probably covered by IAM insurance, so it might depend on what that says.

I was a DIA member because it gives £millions of liability cover. Even so, you can help yourself to avoid potential issues by having a syllabus based on best proven (not just 'Roadcraft says' ) practice, good briefings, etc.

[The Spin Doctor]

This is consistent with my experience too. None of my four local groups use them (two IAM and two RoADAR groups). This is why I was surprised to read Tucker and Rainford advocating them as though it was standard practice (rather than something that seems to be viewed cautiously if not reluctantly). Expense may be the main reason why observers are reluctant to use them, however. Perhaps if they were professional rather than voluntary all the groups would use them? Personally, I would've thought they'd be brilliant. So many observers seem to spend time rejigging their routes for associates who've missed a signal.

I remember one IAM observer said coms use has to be handled extremely carefully because the observer cannot give "instructions" because of insurance issues. I tried to understand his points here but I struggled. Perhaps they're similar to the point you illuded to regarding the IAM's reticence to refer to themselves as 'trainers'? I.e. there's another level of liability that's incurred.

Hmm. Expense? A perfectly adequate pair of Bluetooth radios with an 800m - 1 km (line of sight) range can be had for under £70. That's what I use. The battery lasts about 10 - 12 hours in use, and standby is days - I've forgotten to turn them off and they've still had charge in more than a week later. They charge in about an hour from USB, and they are now five years old.

The one thing that put me off them initially was struggling to find one that would accept an external earpiece - many have the speaker wires hardwired into the unit itself, which means it has to be fitted to the helmet. I did try using Velco but that was a bit of a PITA for me and the trainee who then had to remove it after the course. So I found the sets I am using now - they are available on ebay as V6 intercoms - which have a 3.5mm jack which takes an external headset. That means the BT unit itself can be put in a bag and the trainee gets the headset to keep - it means I don't have to worry about sharing headsets around trainees too, which is a good thing in these COVID-ridden days.

And if you simply use the radios to give directions - "take the next turning on the right, at the roundabout ahead take the second exit towards xxx", you may be giving instructions in terms of where to go, but it's hardly delivering coaching over the radio.

The point about instructing is a moot one. When does the 'Socratic Method' of asking leading questions and getting an associate to figure it out for themselves as they answer turn into a 'teaching technique'? I've always thought the IAM claim not to instruct was borderline sophistry...

...particularly as they now have a syllabus for their instructors - sorry, observers - to follow!

[Bob D.]

Hmm. Expense? A perfectly adequate pair of Bluetooth radios with an 800m - 1 km (line of sight) range can be had for under £70. That's what I use.

A lot of observers / tutors / etc. would probably baulk at the expectation to spend £70 when they're already paying local subs and national annual memberships. They'd probably say sod that, this is voluntary. I'm not paying for the privilege. At least I would anticipate this sort of response from most of them.

The one thing that put me off them initially was struggling to find one that would accept an external earpiece - many have the speaker wires hardwired into the unit itself, which means it has to be fitted to the helmet. I did try using Velco but that was a bit of a PITA for me and the trainee who then had to remove it after the course. So I found the sets I am using now

What make are they? Got a link?

I've always thought the IAM claim not to instruct was borderline sophistry..

Couldn't agree more. I'm just curious as to why such pedantry arises. The 'best' answer I've been able to obtain seems to relate to some form of liability
or litigiousness.

[The Spin Doctor]

A lot of observers / tutors / etc. would probably baulk at the expectation to spend £70 when they're already paying local subs and national annual memberships. They'd probably say sod that, this is voluntary. I'm not paying for the privilege. At least I would anticipate this sort of response from most of them.

Maybe... but the vast majority will already use a Bluetooth set to talk to passenger / mates - and they will probably have paid a LOT more for it too.

What make are they? Got a link?

They are generic 'V6' intercoms. There are a bunch of similar ones. I've got a pair of Fodsports V6 intercoms, plus a third badged as a VNet - they talk to each other fine as they are identical bar the decal. These are now a generation (or possibly two) old. These allow duplex (ie two-way) comms on one channel at a time - that is, you can talk to one person and they can talk back, but the third is out of the loop. The newer ones allow - I believe - full 'net' comms to happen between a group.

As you can see, the headset is connected via a 3.5mm jack. The only thing is, not all earphones work reliably with them as the spacing between the contacts is a bit odd - the same socket connects the charger cable too. Mono D earhanger earphones are the ones I have had most problems with, so I've now sourced some D earhangers which have a stereo plug (even if you only get one speaker!) - they seem to work OK.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/255027362858 ... SwQE9g4Jpl

I bought a pair for £69 in 2017, and got the odd one for just under £40 back in 2020 just in time for lockdown #1.

They come from China... which of course is where all the premium priced ones like Cardo and Senna are made.

Couldn't agree more. I'm just curious as to why such pedantry arises. The 'best' answer I've been able to obtain seems to relate to some form of liability
or litigiousness.

Long ago I heard it was the insurance issue.

Interestingly, RoSPA don't have the same reluctance to talk about training.

[Bob D.]

They are generic 'V6' intercoms. There are a bunch of similar ones. I've got a pair of Fodsports V6 intercoms, plus a third badged as a VNet - they talk to each other fine as they are identical bar the decal. These are now a generation (or possibly two) old. These allow duplex (ie two-way) comms on one channel at a time - that is, you can talk to one person and they can talk back, but the third is out of the loop. The newer ones allow - I believe - full 'net' comms to happen between a group.

Yep - I've heard good things about the Fods - they're well-liked. And yes, you're right - you can get a conference type connection on the newer ones (still for £70-ish). Cheers for the info on the headset side of it as well.

Long ago I heard it was the insurance issue.

Interestingly, RoSPA don't have the same reluctance to talk about training.

Yes this is pretty much what I was hearing too. Didn't know that about RoSPA though.

[Horse]

As you can see, the headset is connected via a 3.5mm jack. The only thing is, not all earphones work reliably with them as the spacing between the contacts is a bit odd - the same socket connects the charger cable too. Mono D earhanger earphones are the ones I have had most problems with, so I've now sourced some D earhangers which have a stereo plug (even if you only get one speaker!) - they seem to work OK.

With PMR radios, I used to carry a selection (all 3.5mm) of types.

Start was with D hanger type, but some head/helmet combos resulted in attempted ear guillotining. If so, I had cheapo stereo earbuds - cheap enough to give away.

[The Spin Doctor]

With PMR radios, I used to carry a selection (all 3.5mm) of types.

Start was with D hanger type, but some head/helmet combos resulted in attempted ear guillotining. If so, I had cheapo stereo earbuds - cheap enough to give away.

Ditto - but here the problem is not the trainee's ear / helmet, it's the construction of the jack itself. It has to be very precise to work with the contacts in the socket.

I ended up trying quite a few different headsets before I found ones that worked reliably.

[Bob D.]

attempted ear guillotining

[Horse]

With PMR radios, I used to carry a selection (all 3.5mm) of types.

Start was with D hanger type, but some head/helmet combos resulted in attempted ear guillotining. If so, I had cheapo stereo earbuds - cheap enough to give away.

Ditto - but here the problem is not the trainee's ear / helmet, it's the construction of the jack itself. It has to be very precise to work with the contacts in the socket.

I ended up trying quite a few different headsets before I found ones that worked reliably.

Indeed, just adding it as an extra consideration.

[scottyuk]

I did all my RoSPA training without comms. The day before my test an Observer said he'd spend the day 1:1 just helping me polish up ready for the test. He suggested we use comms. It was a great day and really useful having the comments realtime.

However, I went from that to the test and I struggled to switch my head back to following the indications given by my examiner. I missed the first two! He pulled the ride over said he doesn't normally judge people in the first mile or two whilst they settle down but of course if that continues then we can't proceed. That snapped my head back into place and it went ok after that.

Def wasn't a good idea to try comms the day before!

[The Spin Doctor]

I did all my RoSPA training without comms. The day before my test an Observer said he'd spend the day 1:1 just helping me polish up ready for the test. He suggested we use comms. It was a great day and really useful having the comments realtime.

However, I went from that to the test and I struggled to switch my head back to following the indications given by my examiner. I missed the first two! He pulled the ride over said he doesn't normally judge people in the first mile or two whilst they settle down but of course if that continues then we can't proceed. That snapped my head back into place and it went ok after that.

Def wasn't a good idea to try comms the day before!

It's an interesting point that the examiner is placing so much emphasis on you spotting his signals... and not how you're riding and dealing with hazards in front of you.

We all like to stick to planned routes - I pick mine to throw up a good mix of standard and unusual hazards, but if someone gets off route, I don't fret about it - I just figure out a way to get us back on track without too much messing around.

You won't fail for not following the DVSA's examiner's directions - he assesses you on how you deal with the hazards you encounter, not your ability to spot an indicator in a mirror.

I had an assessed ride with a guy on a bike with faired-in indicators - I can't recall the bike - and for the first half the the route we were heading into low-ish sun.

After a couple of missed turns (he pulled me up and we had to turn round to get back on his route) I pulled up and told him that I simply couldn't see the indicators because the sun drowned them out.

He was quite grumpy about it and said no-one had ever mentioned it before, and what was he supposed to do about it.

I suggested he stuck an arm out. He was even less impressed with the idea that sitting in £10k-plus of bike, he would have to go back half a century in time

[scottyuk]

The copper doing my test did say he had a planned route to ensure he tested all the areas he wanted to cover and deviating meant he may not be able to. I wasn't in a position to argue. This was 10 years or so ago so it may have changed. When I did my AIM a couple of years ago I made sure I didn't use any comms at all although it was offered and some in the group did.