Learner Drivers to be alowed on the Motorways?

[Softley]

I love how people who took the test prior to it beginning to become harder in the late 90s moan how easy it is these days.

In fact, it has never been harder to pass your driving test for a car or indeed a bike.

The pass rate for the theory test is 65%, mainly dragged down by the hazard perception scores.

There is also all that experience they've gained over the years that helps when it comes to answering theory test questions. The test is aimed at people that have very limited experience. Yes, the answers to some questions should be blatantly obvious to everyone, but there are also some quite sensible questions and people do fail the test. I remember when I was learning to drive and I sat a theory test, if anything, it makes you read the highway code.

 

[domino]

Some people learn to drive later in life and not all youngsters are idiots.

Have a graph of the age groups of people who passed a test over 24 2016/2017

Obviously, if you want a job that requires carrying a passenger you'll have to wait and your family will need to take an Uber to nan's house for Sunday lunch - at least you can carry the presents in the car on your own.

 

[domino]

There is also all that experience they've gained over the years that helps when it comes to answering theory test questions. The test is aimed at people that have very limited experience. Yes, the answers to some questions should be blatantly obvious to everyone, but there are also some quite sensible questions, and people do fail the test. I remember when I was learning to drive and I sat a theory test, if anything, it makes you read the highway code.

The DFT's pass rate statistics of the practical test, once you get over 30, you have over a 60% failure rate.

 

[Softley]

The DFT's pass rate statistics of the practical test, once you get over 30, you have over a 60% failure rate.

What's with the dip in the mid-fifties?

 

[domino]

What's with the dip in the mid-fifties?

That's when driving glove adoption starts.

 

[ShinySideUp]

It's unfair to penalise those drivers because of the behaviours of other drivers.

Unfortunately, through my insurance premiums, I get penalised for the behaviour
of others every time I re-insure my vehicle, uninsured drivers, frivolous accident claims, et al, this is also unfair.

 

[Swarm]

I answered 'B' and 'D'.

 

[MartinL]

Have a graph of the age groups of people who passed a test over 24 2016/2017

The DFT's pass rate statistics of the practical test, once you get over 30, you have over a 60% failure rate.

Yes, but the data is seriously skewed by those who previously failed!
Some have been taking the test & failing.
They all get older every year!

The over 30's failing could have been failing every year since they first started trying at 17!

 

[MartinL]

The theory test is a joke and only an imbecile should fail it. Before I am attacked from all sides allow me to post a couple of sample questions taken from the DVLA website:

1) You are driving on a motorway. You have to slow down quickly due to a hazard. You should:

a Switch on your hazard lights
b Sound your horn
c Switch on your headlights
d Flash your headlights

2) You are driving behind a large goods vehicle. It signals left but steers to the right. You should:

a slow down and let the vehicle turn
b overtake on the right of it
c drive on, keeping to the left
d hold your speed and sound your horn

Surely no one needs to even look up the answers because if the taker of the exam can't work out the correct answer to these two questions then I put it to you that they shouldn't be leaving the house, let alone driving a lethal weapon at national speeds. :

Unfortunately, options B,D & D will have been fulfilled several times on the roads in the past hour across the UK!

The actual test has been shortened in as much as the candidate need only carry out one of the three basic manouvers instead of all three as was the case in times gone by. The test is forty minutes long but the actual driving is only thirty minutes which has not changed for many years. :

Thus confirming that some habitual failers of driving tests can (by virtue of multiple choice), just drop lucky & pass due to not being tested where they are innately incompetent.

Driving conditions these days are much trickier than they were when I first passed and I have seen them change through my two subsequent tests, plus I have had driving assessments as part of my employment so I have seen how things have become more difficult over time.

I would quite happily retake my theory and practical test every, say, ten years. Not going to happen though and under twenty-fives will continue to be the bane of responsible people's lives because they have a new toy and want to show it off to their mates...and people will die because of it.

By the way I should say that I took 4 X Driving tests, (all in the 80's).

 

[B+.]

By the way I should say that I took 4 X Driving tests, (all in the 80's).

Speaking as someone who passed first time (late 70's), I can only say: you didn't study hard enough ;-)

 

[domino]

Thus confirming that some habitual failers of driving tests can (by virtue of multiple choice), just drop lucky & pass due to not being tested where they are innately incompetent.

You've only confirmed your own bias.

There are three tests:

1. The questions
2. The hazard perception test a video based test if you can spot hazards in the road - this is where most people fail
3. The practical.


The very simple truth is that if you took your test prior to the end of the 90s you took a far easier test than you take today.

Between 1996 and 2012 fatal and serious injuries on the road have reduced by two-thirds; whilst the number of cars on the road has increased by almost 10 million cars.

The UK currently has one of the lowest accidents rates of any country.

By all demostrable measures UK drivers are tested harder and drive safer than almost any other driver on the planet.

 

[Hedgerow Honey]

In 1998 took the American HGV test in new Mexico, It was really tough fifty question written test two days before then on day of test full pre start checks including fluid levels/tyre pressures and condition of any drive belts on the engine. Two hour test which include blindside park into an 90 degree offset box then free-way and city driving. I always thought this standard off test should be in this country. Just an observation I have lost count how many people I have seen put the wrong fuel in this year.

 

[charlievictorbravo]

I lived in Canada for a while and a feature of their driving arrangements are worth consideration. If you wanted just to drive a car for social, domestic and pleasure purposes, you took a test for an operators' licence. If you wanted to take a job that involved driving (taxi driver, travelling salesman, delivery driver in small vehicle, etc.) you took a more extensive and difficult test for a chauffeur's' licence. Clearly, the risk is proportional to the exposure to the hazard so a business driver is more likely to be involved in an accident than a non-business driver.

Maybe we should test professional drivers to a higher standard than a non-professional. The professional test should certainly involve motorway driving.

CVB

 

[JWF]

I lived in Canada for a while and a feature of their driving arrangements are worth consideration. If you wanted just to drive a car for social, domestic and pleasure purposes, you took a test for an operators' licence. If you wanted to take a job that involved driving (taxi driver, travelling salesman, delivery driver in small vehicle, etc.) you took a more extensive and difficult test for a chauffeur's' licence. Clearly, the risk is proportional to the exposure to the hazard so a business driver is more likely to be involved in an accident than a non-business driver.

Maybe we should test professional drivers to a higher standard than a non-professional. The professional test should certainly involve motorway driving.

CVB

But surely taxi drivers already demonstrate a high standard of driving due to all the practice they get?

 

[MartinL]

By the way I should say that I took 4 X Driving tests, (all in the 80's).

Speaking as someone who passed first time (late 70's), I can only say: you didn't study hard enough ;-)

Why not?
I managed to pass all 4 of them!
It would appear you only passed one?

 

[psafloyd]

I took my test in October 1988 and passed first time. I had waited five or six months from when my instructor advised (after not many) but as I wanted to do it where I lived, there was a delay.
In that time, I got up to about 30 lessons, plus hundreds of miles of A road driving with my old man all round the home counties.
Still, I had an accident four days after passing. Thankfully, I was vindicated though turning right, as the other driver had overtaken a funeral cortege on the bend and gave a false name and address.
Most people don't drive at speed until after they have passed and haven't a clue about how to use the motorways. I wish that part of the licence was to complete a module on motorway driving in order to teach them the correct etiquette, ie recycle back to the left, not hog the middle lane, driving at speeds that are suitable for road conditions, not tailgaiting, how to use their indicators PROPERLY. After all, they are there to indicate your intentions, not to emphasis a change of direction. This latter point shows the lack of understanding so many drivers have for making these decisions at speed and the impact that has on a driver travelling twice the speed they are used to behind them.

 

[bontbee]

OK, I've got my tin hat and flak jacket on...and this obviously isn't all relevant to motorways, but what about the view from the other side. Pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, motorcyclists, pony and trap? Perhaps every potential driver should experience the road from these perspectives before getting behind the wheel.

 

[psafloyd]

Why? Those hazards should be properly addressed when learning on the road.

I've never ridden a horse and I've no intention to ever ride one, but I have always given them plenty of space, treated them as any other road user and passed at a crawl.

It's not rocket science. However, people either don't get taught this or they don't care. While there is greater selfishness in our society these days, the former is also the case.

I know of MANY instructors telling friends and family there's no need to indicate if there is noone behind you. But indicators are to indicate your intentions, and you can only see a portion of the road behind you. Not, as many use them now, to indicate they have already moved into another lane.

My old man also taught me to treat cyclists as another car, and once past them –-giving them plenty of room –-check that they are still on their bike. If they are, they're no longer your problem.

I also lean forward to extend my side mirrors when doing this and many friends who have driven me have adopted these foibles, not through choice, but found themselves doing them.

However, people these days seem to think their mirrors show everything going on and that braking distances are just mere numbers. What I'd do is make everyone drive on the motorway in an old car like a Morris Minor (it's modern enough for them to cope) in order to get a real understanding for braking distances and indication.

OK, I've got my tin hat and flak jacket on...and this obviously isn't all relevant to motorways, but what about the view from the other side. Pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, motorcyclists, pony and trap? Perhaps every potential driver should experience the road from these perspectives before getting behind the wheel.

 

[Softley]

OK, I've got my tin hat and flak jacket on...and this obviously isn't all relevant to motorways, but what about the view from the other side. Pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders, motorcyclists, pony and trap? Perhaps every potential driver should experience the road from these perspectives before getting behind the wheel.

So as a driver you should experience the road as a cyclist first?

So, should those other road users experience the road as a car driver. I think cyclists should take cycling proficiency test before using the roads. It angers me when (some) cyclists jump red lights, use footpaths and generally endanger themselves as well as other people.

When larning to drive a car you are taught how to treat other road users. A lot of people choose to drive as they wish, which isn't always as they should.

 

[Softley]

Why? Those hazards should be properly addressed when learning on the road.

I've never ridden a horse and I've no intention to ever ride one, but I have always given them plenty of space, treated them as any other road user and passed at a crawl.

It's not rocket science. However, people either don't get taught this or they don't care. While there is greater selfishness in our society these days, the former is also the case.

I know of MANY instructors telling friends and family there's no need to indicate if there is noone behind you. But indicators are to indicate your intentions, and you can only see a portion of the road behind you. Not, as many use them now, to indicate they have already moved into another lane.

My old man also taught me to treat cyclists as another car, and once past them –-giving them plenty of room –-check that they are still on their bike. If they are, they're no longer your problem.

I also lean forward to extend my side mirrors when doing this and many friends who have driven me have adopted these foibles, not through choice, but found themselves doing them.

However, people these days seem to think their mirrors show everything going on and that braking distances are just mere numbers. What I'd do is make everyone drive on the motorway in an old car like a Morris Minor (it's modern enough for them to cope) in order to get a real understanding for braking distances and indication.

Completely agree.

I think putting people in old cars without things like power steering or air bags is a good way for them to experience exactly how vulnerable they are when speeding down the motorway. Never going to happen, I know.