Is it time now to sort out young drivers

[cambsno]

The black boxes are a great idea, but as you say it only encourages drivers to drive smoothly and within the speed limits. It doesn't teach inexperienced drivers good observation skills and how their car will react in an emergency situation and how to correct this. My brother in law fell foul of this driving his son's car on a new stretch of dual carriageway parallel to the older single lane road. The black box thought he was speeding when he wasn't and had to argue with the insurance company who were threatening to revoke the policy.

I read from above that lack of observation seems to be the major cause of many accidents. I wonder how much of this is due to distractions in the cars these days - sat nav maps, phones, listening to music at loud levels, embedding the ventilation functions 3 levels deep in an on screen menu system etc. I've even seen people driving around Aberdeen wearing headphones, which whilst not illegal does show a level of disregard to road safety and other road users.

Thats called experience. we will never get an 18yo to have the same skills as someone who has been doing 30k a year for the last 10 years.

But in terms of observation skills, it is generally 70+ yo drivers who seem to drive on my local 60 road at 40!

 

[Nod]

Would also result in a lot more accidents! Despite the fact I have a bike (only a 125) which I have had for the last 18m, I would not want my kids getting one at 17!

Making learners pass their CBT would be a good start - or making a car based basic test compulsory before learners are allowed on the road.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Would also result in a lot more accidents! Despite the fact I have a bike (only a 125) which I have had for the last 18m, I would not want my kids getting one at 17!

Required basic training as suggested above, plus if everyone has ridden a bike before they should be more bike-aware and have fewer SMIDSY incidents.

Sorry Mate I Didn't See You.

 

[cambsno]

Required basic training as suggested above, plus if everyone has ridden a bike before they should be more bike-aware and have fewer SMIDSY incidents.

Sorry Mate I Didn't See You.

I dont know... most have us have ridden a push bike and there are plenty of SMIDSY incidents with cars and them.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I dont know... most have us have ridden a push bike and there are plenty of SMIDSY incidents with cars and them.

While that's true, as a cyclist it's different. On a motorcycle you're in the middle of the road travelling with the cars, but vulnerable. It builds a greater and different awareness, rather than just hoping the cars see you and don't knock you off.

 

[Nod]

Required basic training as suggested above, plus if everyone has ridden a bike before they should be more bike-aware and have fewer SMIDSY incidents.

Sorry Mate I Didn't See You.

A mate of mine took his car test after 20 years of biking. He almost failed for taking "lifesavers" at junctions.

Another mate, a driving instructor, tells me that he has to stop people who have had bike training doing lifesavers to get them through the test but then start again once they've passed.

They (lifesavers) are still very much part of police and advanced motorcycling training.

 

[ancient_mariner]

A mate of mine took his car test after 20 years of biking. He almost failed for taking "lifesavers" at junctions.

Another mate, a driving instructor, tells me that he has to stop people who have had bike training doing lifesavers to get them through the test but then start again once they've passed.

They (lifesavers) are still very much part of police and advanced motorcycling training.

Lifesaver?

 

[Pound Coin]

Requiring everyone wanting to drive to spend their first year on the road riding a motorcycle would teach a lot of road-craft skills than few can pick up driving a car.

Also cycling.

Learn how vulnerable other road users are. It's not just about road skills, it's about recognising how much danger you are driving.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Also cycling.

Learn how vulnerable other road users are. It's not just about road skills, it's about recognising how much danger you are driving.

As observed above, cycling develops very different skills, largely due to the fact that cyclists move around traffic instead of being part of it. They usually rely on others not to hit them, rather than being capable of effective evasive action themselves.

 

[cambsno]

As observed above, cycling develops very different skills, largely due to the fact that cyclists move around traffic instead of being part of it. They usually rely on others not to hit them, rather than being capable of effective evasive action themselves.

And that is the issue I have with the order of right of way being pedestrian, bike, car.

As a cyclist I know I will not win an argument with a car and I will come off far worse. So I never believe I have right of way and it's up to the car driver to stop. If I get hit I may win the moral argument but will possibly have broken bones or worse. I find that people do not 'fear' the road and cars as they should. You see pedestrians just crossing (sometimes blindly) - why? Maybe they are on phones, maybe they dont check, maybe they feel it is their right to cross when they want as they take priority.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Personal opinion, not based on data or anything else, is that, much as I dislike over-regulation and the nanny state, a mixture of black box technology and restrictions on newly qualified drivers, e.g. can't carry 4 young passengers at night, so can't show off to them, would be a good starting point. Perhaps, although there are both cost and resource implications, some kind of requirement to learn how to actually drive, once people have learned just to pass the test? Suppose people had to ride a moped on a test, perhaps a large van or small lorry?

Motorbikes are a great learning experience, but only for the survivors. Forget about other drivers, a tiny spill of oil on the road, a puddle, a pothole, a bit of gravel, invisible at night and often even in good daylight conditions, can be fatal.

Sadly, one of my sons has a bike that can do about 190 mph and another has one that can do about 120, I really wish that they didn't have them . . .

Lifesaver - that last-second physical look-behind before overtaking, doesn't matter what the mirror does or doesn't show, just turn and look

 

[Pound Coin]

Back to cycling - learning defensive and anticipatory cycling is really important. But there's a huge benefit in getting car drivers to have ridden a bike and seen what it is like. You understand why bikes avoid potholes and the door zone, why they go slower up hill, why they take primary position.

All too often the driver attitude is that they have the right of way, when that is not the simple case.

If drivers learned about the needs and foibles of other road users, it would be a lot more pleasant for everyone. (Like drivers learning they cannot see round corners, or can't defy the laws of physics - two things increasingly that they seem to do. - possibly related to the increase in power and driving experience noted above).

There a re so many nasty tropes around about other road users. e.g. the ones about pedestrians crossing the roads blindly. Cyclists having no lights. Cyclists all in black. Why are horse riders here - they should be on a bridleway.. All easily perpetuated, glibly repeated without much thought. All these contribute to a difficult environment for non-car users. Where are the tropes about drivers speeding, using their phones, not wearing seat belts? These are more dangerous.

Roads are used by lots of different groups. They need to co-exist, not throw tropes about.

 

[Mr Bump]

A mate of mine took his car test after 20 years of biking. He almost failed for taking "lifesavers" at junctions.

Another mate, a driving instructor, tells me that he has to stop people who have had bike training doing lifesavers to get them through the test but then start again once they've passed.

They (lifesavers) are still very much part of police and advanced motorcycling training.

yeah odd, always do lifesavers in the car especially on motorway

 

[Mr Bump]

I rode Motorbikes for 30 years, finally got off the saddle about 3 years ago and my wife does ask me often do i miss it, and the answer curiously is no, i also class myself as a survivor lol, i rode some fast bikes pretty damned fast and never had an off, consider myself a bit blessed, when we finally get residency in GC though i will buy a nother small bike maybe just a 500 for me and the wife to just get out and up the coast a bit, maybe into the hills.

 

[Nod]

Lifesaver?

An extra look to check the blindspot.

 

[Pound Coin]

An extra look to check the blindspot.

Also called observations

Observations - principles and practice - Lightningpass

Observations – principles and practice What exactly is an “Observation” or “Lifesaver” during Motorcycle Training? Much of the training is taken up teaching people to do Observations or Lifesavers. The examiner will expect you to do these looks in the test for the right reason at the right...

www.lightningpass.com

Can't for the life of me see how it is beneficial to teach new drivers not to observe like this.

 

[Nod]

Neither can I (or the police riders who I was chatting to about it a few months back.)

After all, "Think once, think twice, think BIKE!" was a government sponsored campaign, so why the DVSA examiners are against it, I don't know!

 

[LCPete]

We both ride and drive and always check/lifesavers in the car as well especially as newer cars seem to have poorer visibility/blind spots