Ferg
|
| posted on 28/5/05 at 08:05 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally incorrectly spelt then posted by clbarclay
Freg
The boys in the care if front/behind are just as bad as the mates in the car, if not worse because they start to race each other.
Oh very true, but it's a damage limitation thing isn't it. There's little I can do about them, that has to be up to him, but
reducing the number IN the car can only be a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 28/5/05 at 03:27 PM |
|
|
Some drivers get worse as they get older most (up to a certain age) get safe. Young driver good or bad drive mainly based on his or her reactions to
what they see ahead, older drivers drive more on anticipation based on past experience --- to drive totally based on one or the other is unsafe.
To a large extent it based on perception of risk, near me there is a very nasty blind corner on a very narrow road that is used as cut through by
comuters. The odds of meeting a car comming the otherway on that corner doing something truly daft are perhaps 1000 to 1. A younger driver see those
odds as relatively low risk and takes the corner faster using more of the road.
I have already been round that corner perhaps 5,000 times in 30 years and have encountered true idiots on that stretch of road hence regard the same
1000 to 1 as very short odds.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 28/5/05 at 07:18 PM |
|
|
my first car nearly killed me (or i nearly used it to kill myself). It was a slow as heck 34 hp mini. still went fast enought to hit a tree and put me
out of action for 3 months.
my 17 year old has a 947cc saxo. cost 1375 to insure this 50hp beast. Would it not have made more sense for ins co not to restrict new drivers to use
tiny flimsy cars on grounds of cost. Anything much bigger than a saxo was ballistic money.
In my view, most people's ideas of their driving skills are way too inflated.
i have had discussions in the pasts on here that by their nature (small light high power) locosts are dangerous. As arguments back ive had people are
skilled drivers, know what they are doing, and are too careful to have an accident.
there have been a good few cars on here stuffed into barriers in the last few months.
Putting P plates might not do too much to restirct a new driver. Remember a driver in their first two years of full license can be knocked back to
provisional if they get six points. dont seem to do much.
also, the bike test needs you to jump thro several hoops nowadays to pass - still doesnt stop the wanK"£rs I see often, taking chances, weaving
on motorways.
ego and adrenalin + lack of skill with a big of bad judgement = accident.
retaking driving tests every 5 years or so is a daft idea. passing a driving test teaches you very little real life driving skills in the first place.
I agree with the statement earlier that 99% of people on here are likely to fail a retest cos its not driving skills that matter, its doing what the
test requires that gets you a pass. Just imagine getting a fail - thats tantamount to a ban on dirvin and how would you get to work and earn money to
live?
Adam - putting stiffer penalties on people isnt the answer. Its easy to make the occasional driving error - who doesnt - and to get clobbered by the
law just cos you made a minor error would soon have you off the road.
atb
steve
[Edited on 28/5/05 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
Spyderman
|
| posted on 3/6/05 at 10:06 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
1. In my view, most people's ideas of their driving skills are way too inflated.
2. retaking driving tests every 5 years or so is a daft idea. passing a driving test teaches you very little real life driving skills in the first
place. I agree with the statement earlier that 99% of people on here are likely to fail a retest cos its not driving skills that matter, its doing
what the test requires that gets you a pass. Just imagine getting a fail - thats tantamount to a ban on dirvin and how would you get to work and earn
money to live?
3.Adam - putting stiffer penalties on people isnt the answer. Its easy to make the occasional driving error - who doesnt - and to get clobbered by
the law just cos you made a minor error would soon have you off the road.
steve
1. Couldn't agree more, us included!
Willingness to learn new skills would tend to suppress this somewhat though!
2.Why daft? The test is not to teach you, but to test your knowledge/ability.
The simple solution to avoid losing your licence would be to pass your re-test. Simple!
If you are in danger of losing your licence then surely you are going to do everything in your power to comply with the conditions of the test?
It is not the DVLA or driving standards agency or whatever's responsibility to keep you on the road, it is yours.
3. Why would stiffer penalties worry you if you are not doing anything wrong? "Ah just in case"!
If you made a minor error I'm sure the Police dealing with you would use discretion. If not then go to court and plead!
Where do you draw the line between the occasional error and regular habits? Surely the ideal is no errors? Aiming lower is pointless. It would be like
saying that killing X amount of people is acceptable, just don't kill Y.
Steps down off soapbox!
Spyderman
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 3/6/05 at 10:23 PM |
|
|
I cant understand why the negative comments on a 5 year re-test?
If you know your re-test is coming, what happens... you naturally improve your driving to such an extent that it becomes second nature on the day of
the re-test therefore you pass. Following this, you still drive well until you fall back to your usual technique some time later. However, you have
improved your driving for the period of time before and after the test albeit a small period of time. That time could be the time that you could have
had an accident...
Look at it this way; if lots of people are either in the up-zone or down-zone from re-test the generic standard improves for us all. Therefore the
insurance comapanies can make even more money from us!
As I have said before - my company promotes good driving standards and heavy influences us (makes us) go on driving courses. We get reduced insurance
premiums because of it - the stats speak for themselves. This is almost like a re-test for us every two years or so. It obviously leaves traces of
improved driving behind on every course we go on - therefore improving our standard overall. I'm not what i class the best driver - but
I'm certainly not the worst!
[Edited on 3-6-05 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 3/6/05 at 10:44 PM |
|
|
answers to 2 and 3....
2. a driving test as it is doenst actually make you a good driver. it simply tests that you can park in a space, can reverse around a corner, 3 point
turn, blah de blah. what it doesnt do is teach icy weather driving, skid recovery, collision avoidance, and the kinda 'on the road' best
practice you learn with time. Now, if you had to do a course that refreshed your knowlege, and you got to go on a skid pan, and brush up on useful
skills, thats different. Getting failed cos you forgot to look over your sholder as you approached a junction and can no longer drive the 100 miles a
day I have to do to work, would be a major blow. A 'refresher experience' would be a good idea. Lets face it, most experienced drivers on
here have forgotten what you need to do to pass a test.
3. 'motorist persecution'. I remember Adam saying a couple months back that he and his dad had been on the bike and had cut in front of a
truck or something to get off a slip road. If a cop was there, that would have been dangerous driving. As it was, there wasnt. Adams dad got a lucky
break. Or Adams dad may well be having problems getting to work to live too. Speed cams - how many of us love them? If you want best safety practice,
lets put them in every cats eye and set them for 31 mph. And double the fine.
Yes, there are rules. But I suspect at some time or another, we dont follow them as in our best judgement, we feel it would be fun not to. Its wrong,
but 85 on a motorway in the right conditions feels nicer than 70.
Problem is, in the context of this thread, 17 year old drivers have crap judgement, little life experience, and little real knowlege of pain and
danger.
crash a car into a tree at 19 like I did (and be very lucky to survive it) and you learn it hurts to make mistakes. Still, after time, the memory
fades and you go back to 'normal'.
atb
steve
[Edited on 3/6/05 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/6/05 at 11:10 PM |
|
|
the retest doesnt have to be like the first driving test - poor mirror use could just be just something they remind you of at the end.
unfortunately, they things that they should look out for (like inappropriate use of speed, tailgating etc) are easily avoided by drivers who know they
are wrong but dont want to change their regular driving habits.
most of the stuff that they teach for the driving test is actually useful stuff that you should keep doing forever. certainly the mirror use, and even
feeding the wheel is there for a reason - can you honestly say that your hand has never slipped off the wheel when steering one handed? mine has twice
that i remember, fortunately not at crucial moments. But when feeding the wheel between hands, you have never let go and can still go from lock to
lock very quickly.
really, to accurately assess someones driving, they would have to not know you were there...
|
|
|
Spyderman
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
2. a driving test as it is doenst actually make you a good driver. it simply tests that you can park in a space, can reverse around a corner, 3 point
turn, blah de blah. what it doesnt do is teach icy weather driving, skid recovery, collision avoidance, and the kinda 'on the road' best
practice you learn with time. Now, if you had to do a course that refreshed your knowlege, and you got to go on a skid pan, and brush up on useful
skills, thats different. Getting failed cos you forgot to look over your sholder as you approached a junction and can no longer drive the 100 miles a
day I have to do to work, would be a major blow. A 'refresher experience' would be a good idea. Lets face it, most experienced drivers on
here have forgotten what you need to do to pass a test.
The test is nothing more than what it says, a "TEST". It is the training that takes you up to the test that is the important part. How
do you asses the knowledge gained from the training without a "test"?
If you have a test coming up then it is in your own self interest to refresh your abilities and knowledge. It is not the Government or anybody
else's responsibility to make sure you are up to standard, regardless of how far you have to travel for work!
Skid pan training is available, but as it's not compulsory hardly anyone takes it.
A refresher course would be good, but would you take one if you didn't have to?
If you had to pay for a refresher coarse that was done by assessment, then surely you would make sure your driving was of as high a standard as
possible, so to pay for as minimal training as was necessary.
I have not forgotten what is involved with taking the test as I have had regular assessments and training (mostly paid for by my employer) due to the
job I did. I covered a lot more than 100 miles a day, 6 days a week and made it my business to keep upto date with the changes in rules and
regulations.
quote:
3. 'motorist persecution'. I remember Adam saying a couple months back that he and his dad had been on the bike and had cut in front of a
truck or something to get off a slip road. If a cop was there, that would have been dangerous driving. As it was, there wasnt. Adams dad got a lucky
break. Or Adams dad may well be having problems getting to work to live too.
Adams dad was lucky only in respect to the fact that he never caused an accident. To say you are lucky in not being caught commiting an offence is
irresponsible. (I'm not implying Adams dad was commiting on offence.)
By that same logic we may as well change the law so that if you can avoid being caught for a year you can get away with murder!  Similar to
the rules for prosecution of motoring offences.
quote:
Speed cams - how many of us love them? If you want best safety practice, lets put them in every cats eye and set them for 31 mph. And double the
fine.
As has already been discussed speed cameras are for revenue generation not road safety.
quote:
Yes, there are rules. But I suspect at some time or another, we dont follow them as in our best judgement, we feel it would be fun not to. Its wrong,
but 85 on a motorway in the right conditions feels nicer than 70.
Problem is, in the context of this thread, 17 year old drivers have crap judgement, little life experience, and little real knowlege of pain and
danger.
crash a car into a tree at 19 like I did (and be very lucky to survive it) and you learn it hurts to make mistakes. Still, after time, the memory
fades and you go back to 'normal'.
Agreed, but allowing a teenager to crash his/her car on the highways is not the right way to gain experience. Experience should be gained from
training. The Police don't send their drivers crashing into trees to get them experienced! (might be a good idea though!)
Terry
Sorry for the long threads, but it is a subject I feel strongly about!
Spyderman
|
|
|
MkIndy7
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 06:59 PM |
|
|
Bit of an unusual twist on things here and yes suprise suprise from somebody young, Have you ever considered a power cap could be a dangerous thing in
certain circumstances.
When you try overtaking something on a hill and then struggle to get around it, but other cars have already started overtaking yup your stuck!
admittedly driver error in the 1st place as you misjudged that you thought you could get round it.
( a bit like that 5th gear test i think it was "time exposed to danger" test when they were overtalking a lorry)
Now this is going to sound really daft and i'll take some stick for it but, Wouldn't NOS just be perfect for this to get you out of a
situation, not to use it to put you in 1 in the 1st place.
Although driver inexperience has caused this(which your always going to have), surely a power cap would hinder them further.
|
|
|
Noodle
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 07:26 PM |
|
|
Could be evolution.
Neil.
*Ducks for cover*
Your sort make me sick
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 10:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
can you honestly say that your hand has never slipped off the wheel when steering one handed?
can you honestly say you could take collision avoidance, or control a tank slapper, skid on ice, by feeding the wheel?
atb
steve
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
spyderman.
I wasnt suggesting people need to crash into trees to learn! It was an illustration that youth thinks its indestructable until something mortal
happens. In your teens you think that life is forever and death is a zillion years away at 85 or some such age. Not an over zealous use of throttle
coming home with yer mates on a wet bend. (that wasnt my accidnet scenario btw).
speed cams...................
i dont like speed cameras. But i can see places where they are of benefit.
Personally, I think the revenue generation thing is a bit of bollox. its insignifcant.
1m fines a year is 60m quid.
there are 28m vehicles on the road - lest assume they are all lowly emssion cars at 120 quid road tax each.
Thats 3360m friggin quid revenue a year!
and by annoying lots of people and vote risking with speed cams, they get to make another 60m. They would make more than that by putting up road tax
by 3 quid a vehicle.
I am against naany state speed cams, but there are places they really ought to be.
The argument that they are revenue generators is just complete guff - only fully realised by myself when I just did that calculation.
BTW - in that 60m revenue, you have to take out the cost of all the cams, lasers, vans, staff to operate them, the paper processing system. I recon
that very little is actually made from speeding fines in signifcant terms.
atb
steve
[Edited on 5/6/05 by stephen_gusterson]
[Edited on 5/6/05 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 10:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MkIndy7
Bit of an unusual twist on things here and yes suprise suprise from somebody young, Have you ever considered a power cap could be a dangerous thing in
certain circumstances.
When you try overtaking something on a hill and then struggle to get around it, but other cars have already started overtaking yup your stuck!
admittedly driver error in the 1st place as you misjudged that you thought you could get round it.
( a bit like that 5th gear test i think it was "time exposed to danger" test when they were overtalking a lorry)
Now this is going to sound really daft and i'll take some stick for it but, Wouldn't NOS just be perfect for this to get you out of a
situation, not to use it to put you in 1 in the 1st place.
Although driver inexperience has caused this(which your always going to have), surely a power cap would hinder them further.
OR,
NOS
would ensure that you went into the front of that truck just that little bit especially faster.
atb
steve
How would you stop people pushing boost buttons for a laff when they felt like it? Like an old vid game when you get 3 boosts per race?
Id prefer a hyperspace button 
|
|
|
MkIndy7
|
| posted on 5/6/05 at 10:29 PM |
|
|
Suppose its the old case of the Irresponsable idiots would use it all the time
and only rarely would it help somebody that found themselves in an "unfortunate" situation and needed a bit more power.
|
|
|
indykid
|
| posted on 6/6/05 at 07:10 PM |
|
|
from my driving lessons, i learnt enough to allow me to pass my test first time with 4 minors. it's better than any of my friends got, but i
still don't profess to be a perfect driver.
however, you can't become a perfect driver from taking your test over and over. all that would do would be to make you really good at reversing
round corners.
it's the structured approach that hellfire talks about that would be of most use in the real world. the standard test does not assess drivers to
a high enough degree, and the ares of assessment need to be widened.
so what if you can pass your driving test? it won't help you when a kid runs out infront of you and you have to stop sharpish in a car with no
abs. there's no mention of cadence braking anymore as it's assumed you'll never need to know......evrthing has
abs.........doesn't it?
many of my friends, will potter off into the sunset, with their test certificate in hand, and never think about driving skills again. what does it
matter, they've got a piece of paper to say they can drive.
since my test, i've tried to find out braking performance, limits of adhesion etc etc of the car i drive, and having found them drive well
within those limts. it's the mentality of the driver, and willingness to learn that determines their competence as much as anything.
[facetious bit]and anyway just because you've held your license longer than me, what's to say you're a better driver than me?
a friend of my parents is 40 odd, but no one will get in the car gladly with him because he is a liability, yet has not had a serious accident to my
knowledge in his driving life.[/facetious bit]
i just think it's time we stop discriminating against people just because they're young.
it's bad enough that my insurance for the indy will be nearly 8 times what some pay, without you telling me i shouldn't be able to drive
it.
gotta go now. i've turned green and my t shirt's split clean off me
tom
|
|
|
