Restriction to a radius would be stupid. How would it be enforced? So if the restriction was 7 Miles and I went to my Grans that's 6.9 miles away, how would I get to my shop that's 7.1 miles away?
Dom
Dom
Learner drivers could be allowed on motorways.
- Thread starter Shadeyman
- Start date
Currently reading:
Learner drivers could be allowed on motorways.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2008
- Messages
- 4,883
- Points
- 860
Re: Learner on Motorways
How do you feel about lorry drivers then.
I've been in the car with a few people on motorways, a few of each age group. Some of the more sensible young ones feel that doing 40-50MPH is safer.
Dom
How do you feel about lorry drivers then
.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2003
- Messages
- 46,073
- Points
- 7,134
Drive to your gran's house, park up and walk the 0.2 mile to the shop!So if the restriction was 7 Miles and I went to my Grans that's 6.9 miles away, how would I get to my shop that's 7.1 miles away?
How do you feel about lorry drivers then
On a 3+ lane motorway fine, but on a 2 lane they should stick to lane 1.
Drive to your gran's house, park up and walk the 0.2 mile to the shop!
Walk?! Wtf is walking?!
Dom
Re: Learner on Motorways
50 mph in the inside lane is more than safe enough, it's the other :tosser: who can't read the road who seem to think its not as long as people arnt straying into the middle or outside lane doing this, unless the traffic flow is of such that it permits this.
And for those that haven't tried it, the MPG is amazing
I've been in the car with a few people on motorways, a few of each age group. Some of the more sensible young ones feel that doing 40-50MPH is safer.
Dom
50 mph in the inside lane is more than safe enough, it's the other :tosser: who can't read the road who seem to think its not
as long as people arnt straying into the middle or outside lane doing this, unless the traffic flow is of such that it permits this.And for those that haven't tried it, the MPG is amazing
Re: Learner on Motorways
It's all geared up for tracking systems. I don't really have a problem with this, if implemented properly it could see a massive decline in idiotic driving and a massive decline in accidents.
It's all geared up for tracking systems. I don't really have a problem with this, if implemented properly it could see a massive decline in idiotic driving and a massive decline in accidents.
OP
OP
Re: Learner on Motorways
Restricting power and how far they can drive is stupid. Most accidents happen close to home plus most new drivers can't afford powerful cars.
Now if insurance companies insisted under 25's had trackers installed I'm sure their driving would improve.
Restricting power and how far they can drive is stupid. Most accidents happen close to home plus most new drivers can't afford powerful cars.
Now if insurance companies insisted under 25's had trackers installed I'm sure their driving would improve.
Re: Learner on Motorways
LOL is your first sentence in response to my post or just the second?
LOL is your first sentence in response to my post or just the second?
Can those who thing trackers will improve driving explain the theiroy behind this because I don't follow the logic.
1. No speeding if you know you are being monitored.
2. No erratic/wreckless driving
That's it I guess. It's less of a tracker, more of a monitor.
2. No erratic/wreckless driving
That's it I guess. It's less of a tracker, more of a monitor.
But you don't need to be speeding to be driving dangerously and all a tracker will do is pin point you on a map, no more, so for all it knows you could be driving ok when your actually tailgating, or cutting people up, jumping lights etc.
50 mph in the inside lane is more than safe enough, it's the other :tosser: who can't read the road who seem to think its not
And for those that haven't tried it, the MPG is amazing
Safe enough for them, not the lorry that pulls into lane 2 without looking what's overtaking them then takes ages to overtake the person in lane 1.
A 'black box' would be better I think?
"Black box" type of thing where it measures your cornering/braking/accelleration etc.
Dom
Well they can't be held responsible for the poo driving skills of other road users if lorrys arnt looking before overtaking. And most lorrys pass within 30sec when they're sitting on their limiter overtaking someone doing 50.
Black boxes are an idea with gyro sensors fitted, but having used sisters car when it had one fitted and monitoring how it worked it was often very much a danger in itself IMO. Although perhaps hers was just to sensitive? Who knows.
OP
OP
Re: Learner on Motorways
Just the second ..
So restricting the power of the car or stopping them driving more than 20 miles from home will??
If you drive like a turd and the tracker catches you the insurance company cancels your insurance, one less turd on the road. Sounds like a good idea to me ...
Something similar is already being offered.
http://www.coverbox.co.uk/young_drivers.php
Just the second ..
So restricting the power of the car or stopping them driving more than 20 miles from home will??
If you drive like a turd and the tracker catches you the insurance company cancels your insurance, one less turd on the road. Sounds like a good idea to me ...
Something similar is already being offered.
http://www.coverbox.co.uk/young_drivers.php
Last edited:
Re: Learner on Motorways
Restricting power in some cases will, never said that limiting their distance of travel will though
Sister had something like that with admiral in partnership with Greenroad. Like I've said was flawed IMO.
Restricting power in some cases will, never said that limiting their distance of travel will though
Sister had something like that with admiral in partnership with Greenroad. Like I've said was flawed IMO.
True but they present the lorry drivers with an extra hazard of having to overtake whilst they're eating their beans from their knee..
Why is having a black box fitted a danger?
Dom
A couple of qualifications could be in order here.
First, I never said that monitoring the suggestions I made would be easy, but if you pass a motorcycle test you are limited to a small capacity, low powered machine and the powers that be have decided that the initiative has cut down on road deaths, although it has to be said that a sizeable number of motorcyclist casualties affected the so-called "Born again bikers" who were middle aged men returning to biking after a break of several years and who already had full licences.
In the late '70s, the first version of the Vauxhall Astra (nee Opel Kadett) gained a 1.6 SR model. In comparison with the 1.6 GL, the only differences were in terms of trim; black lower outside panels, different steering wheel, different (Recaro-esque) seats, different road wheels and low profile tyres. With the exception of the tyres, there was no difference, mechanically, between the two models. It could be argued that the tyres would cut down stopping distance and reduce the risk of driving into a tree, yet the SR carried with it a higher insurance group. Why? Because it was perceived that if you give a car a sporty image then the people who drive it will drive it more aggressively and therefore be a higher risk. So if you reduce the power available to a young driver there will be a lower inherrent risk. Of course there will always be exceptions.
When I were a lad the overriding restriction was the power and performance of the cars available. Today it's more down to the cost of insurance. There are plenty of young drivers who can afford cars like Subaru Imprezas or VW Golf V5s.....what they can't afford is the insurance, so in many cases they simply don't insure them. Patience is not normally a quality known to be prevalent among the younger members of our society, God knows, when I wanted to be somewhere (geographically or socially) I wanted to be there yesterday so I understand what they are going through, but perhaps there has been too much "do what you want, when you want to do it".
Restricting distance? When the majority of people pass a driving test in the UK, they do it within an urban environment so after passing your test in Manchester, to allow people to then drive on a motorway and 70 limit dual carriageway to Bangor and then through Snowdonia could be argued to be irresponsible at the least. The reason most of those drivers don't end up in A&E is more down to there being no incidents along the way rather than any driving skills. Unless Pass+ is conducted, new drivers will have nothing to prepare them for what might be round the next bend. If that turns out to be nothing, then the drivers consider themselves, if they actually do think about it, as being some kind of driving god and then remain ignorant of the risks involved.
If you have less aggressively styled and less powerful cars then those who drive them will use them less aggressively.
If you restrict the distance a young driver can go, then you limit the scope for being outside their sphere of knowledge and therefore the level of unknown risk.
In the U.S. extensive research has shown that the most dangerous young drivers are those who are out after dark with their mates. The safest were those who were driving in daylight with their grandmother(s). Being out late at night increased the likelihood that drugs and alcohol would be an issue and with mates meant an increase in peer pressure. If out in the car with a girl, then trying to impress her with your driving prowess would be a major factor.
You can look back at statistics and see that, for example, between the late '80s and late Noughties the death rate on UK roads went down from over 4,500 to around 3,000. To cut it by around a third in 20 years is no mean feat, although there are many reasons for the cut, young drivers are still a serious problem and no single measure will cut out the casualty figures completely. That is with the exception of raising the minimum age for driving to around 35. Mmm, now then, there's an idea.....
First, I never said that monitoring the suggestions I made would be easy, but if you pass a motorcycle test you are limited to a small capacity, low powered machine and the powers that be have decided that the initiative has cut down on road deaths, although it has to be said that a sizeable number of motorcyclist casualties affected the so-called "Born again bikers" who were middle aged men returning to biking after a break of several years and who already had full licences.
In the late '70s, the first version of the Vauxhall Astra (nee Opel Kadett) gained a 1.6 SR model. In comparison with the 1.6 GL, the only differences were in terms of trim; black lower outside panels, different steering wheel, different (Recaro-esque) seats, different road wheels and low profile tyres. With the exception of the tyres, there was no difference, mechanically, between the two models. It could be argued that the tyres would cut down stopping distance and reduce the risk of driving into a tree, yet the SR carried with it a higher insurance group. Why? Because it was perceived that if you give a car a sporty image then the people who drive it will drive it more aggressively and therefore be a higher risk. So if you reduce the power available to a young driver there will be a lower inherrent risk. Of course there will always be exceptions.
When I were a lad the overriding restriction was the power and performance of the cars available. Today it's more down to the cost of insurance. There are plenty of young drivers who can afford cars like Subaru Imprezas or VW Golf V5s.....what they can't afford is the insurance, so in many cases they simply don't insure them. Patience is not normally a quality known to be prevalent among the younger members of our society, God knows, when I wanted to be somewhere (geographically or socially) I wanted to be there yesterday so I understand what they are going through, but perhaps there has been too much "do what you want, when you want to do it".
Restricting distance? When the majority of people pass a driving test in the UK, they do it within an urban environment so after passing your test in Manchester, to allow people to then drive on a motorway and 70 limit dual carriageway to Bangor and then through Snowdonia could be argued to be irresponsible at the least. The reason most of those drivers don't end up in A&E is more down to there being no incidents along the way rather than any driving skills. Unless Pass+ is conducted, new drivers will have nothing to prepare them for what might be round the next bend. If that turns out to be nothing, then the drivers consider themselves, if they actually do think about it, as being some kind of driving god and then remain ignorant of the risks involved.
If you have less aggressively styled and less powerful cars then those who drive them will use them less aggressively.
If you restrict the distance a young driver can go, then you limit the scope for being outside their sphere of knowledge and therefore the level of unknown risk.
In the U.S. extensive research has shown that the most dangerous young drivers are those who are out after dark with their mates. The safest were those who were driving in daylight with their grandmother(s). Being out late at night increased the likelihood that drugs and alcohol would be an issue and with mates meant an increase in peer pressure. If out in the car with a girl, then trying to impress her with your driving prowess would be a major factor.
You can look back at statistics and see that, for example, between the late '80s and late Noughties the death rate on UK roads went down from over 4,500 to around 3,000. To cut it by around a third in 20 years is no mean feat, although there are many reasons for the cut, young drivers are still a serious problem and no single measure will cut out the casualty figures completely. That is with the exception of raising the minimum age for driving to around 35. Mmm, now then, there's an idea.....
black box is too big brother state.
make it so they can only drive on roads with an r in or only roads without an r in
make it so they can only drive on roads with an r in or only roads without an r in
Erm yes that's why I said monitor rather than tracker.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,219
- Points
- 3,671
Limited power would be the best tbh. That 19yr old Burk in the range rover sport wouldn't have been as dangerous if this had been the case.
