Learner drivers could be allowed on motorways.

[dombooth]

I did say it could be difficult to enforce, but the powers that be manage it with motorcycles. Plus the fact it's relatively easy for the Cops to judge the age of a driver they see, but almost impossible to do it for someone wearing a full face helmet. Plus the fact that 7 miles would be ridiculous, 30 being far more practical. But, if you're drawing the conclusion that young/new drivers can't drive outside the given radius at all, all they need do is take the further training. A young lad I taught to drive several years ago had a number of crashes in his car, so much so that seeing he was on a limited income being an apprentice, his father refused to help him pay for a new clutch which was slipping badly and therefore acted as a speed limiter. It still didn't stop him stuffing his Astra into the front of a 4WD coming the other way on a bend. If only he'd taken Pass+ he might have learnt how to take a bend properly.

What would this further training be?

Pass Plus is utterly useless, it doesn't teach you how to take a bend either.

Dom

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

I obviously couldn't comment on the Driving Instructor in question, but the DSA advises that drivers should signal where it would help another road user, and not signal all the time for every lane change, change of speed or corner. If you walk into an empty room do you say hello? Of course not, so why indicate if no-one would benefit. I often turn corners, change lanes and join or leave motorways without signalling. If a driver's maneouvre will not cause another driver to change speed or direction, why signal.

That's not what I was taught back in 06 and I don't remember seeing that in the highway code of late. I know that there is no point in signalling if no one is about, and is indeed something that'll be pick up on a driving test, but how can one justify if ones signal is going to be beneficial to another or not?

Take for example this scenario, and hell I've seen it happen nearly with serious outcomes on more than one occasion.

Motorway - inside lane a car is about to enter middle lane to overtake someone. Outside lane someone has just finished an overtake and is about to return to the middle lane, both fail to signal and go at the same time.

But each have a lane between them origionaly so why would signalling benefit each other

Signalling is a basic and one of the least strenuous things to do when driving, if people can't manage this then gawd help us IMO.

 

[jip0]

i was taught to signal unless you couldn't see anything infront of you or behind you otherwise its unnecessary.

with the exception on junctions where you always indicate. and maybe roundabouts i cant remember

i signal all the time anyway its just habbit

 

[arc]

re multi lane roads; I was taught that if you are moving inside to outside, then you should indicate. If you are moving outside to inside then you don't need to (as traffic should always be as inside as possible) - but it's always best to indicate anyway.

Motorway - inside lane a car is about to enter middle lane to overtake someone. Outside lane someone has just finished an overtake and is about to return to the middle lane, both fail to signal and go at the same time.

Inside lane car will have seen the car in the outside lane, it should know that traffic should keep to the inside so knows that it needs to signal it's intentions.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

Inside lane car will have seen the car in the outside lane, it should know that traffic should keep to the inside so knows that it needs to signal it's intentions.

But outside lane car should signal also really. Just because it should be changing lane doesn't mean it won't, and assuming it will can leave you waiting along time for a gap in both lanes on busy motorways such as the M25.

 

[arc]

I agree, and we all know you can't rely on drivers to automatically keep left when they should. I always indicate if there are cars around me - I'm just saying how the highway code says it should work.

 

[The Beard]

What would this further training be?

Pass Plus is utterly useless, it doesn't teach you how to take a bend either.

Dom

Er, yes it does. If you didn't learn about apexes, vanishing points, understeer, oversteer, adverse cambers, sight lines, direction of lamp posts the meaning of SLOW road markings not to mention quantities of signs and road markings then you had a crap instructor. Get a decent one and do it again. Unless of course you know it all.

 

[The Beard]

That's not what I was taught back in 06 and I don't remember seeing that in the highway code of late. I know that there is no point in signalling if no one is about, and is indeed something that'll be pick up on a driving test, but how can one justify if ones signal is going to be beneficial to another or not?

Take for example this scenario, and hell I've seen it happen nearly with serious outcomes on more than one occasion.

Motorway - inside lane a car is about to enter middle lane to overtake someone. Outside lane someone has just finished an overtake and is about to return to the middle lane, both fail to signal and go at the same time.

But each have a lane between them origionaly so why would signalling benefit each other

Signalling is a basic and one of the least strenuous things to do when driving, if people can't manage this then gawd help us IMO.

Ok, take your scenario there for a moment. Will a signal to move from lane 1 to lane 2 if there is a vehicle nearby in lane 3 be useful? I would say yes, because working on the principle of driving on the left except when overtaking then I would expect that the driver in lane 3 was not anticipating my overtake and therefore signal to avoid moving into each other's space as there is a good chane he will want to move back to lane 2. However, take the car in lane 3 out of the equation and the signal becomes superfluous.

How about a signal to leave a motorway? If there's another car behind travelling at a similar or greater speed then yes of course it will. But if, for example you are travelling at 70 and vehicles behind are travelling more slowly because they are HGVs then why would the drivers of those truck drivers need your signal.

Continuing your theme of signalling being a basic and non-strenuous activity, maybe you should consider that is in itself a problem. When do you signal to leave a motorway? How many times do you see drivers signal at the 100 yard countdown marker, or even as they get to start of the slip road. Do you consider that 9 seconds is enough time to signal for? If you do, then that's about the length of time it takes a car travelling at 70 to cover 300 yards. Signalling at 100, 50, 25 yards or even zero is almost useless.

I'm not anti-signalling, just pro-correct signalling.

i was taught to signal unless you couldn't see anything infront of you or behind you otherwise its unnecessary.

with the exception on junctions where you always indicate. and maybe roundabouts i cant remember

i signal all the time anyway its just habbit

My argument against signalling all the time is that it is pure laziness. The major consideration before any change of speed or direction, with the possible exception of emergency braking, is observation. Those that signal automatically tend to use the signal as a safety net which means they don't use their mirrors enough. How many times do you see a car signal then start to change lanes only for the driver to realise at the last second there's another vehicle overtaking them? A friend of mine, after spending three years in a wheelchair manages to get round quite well on his artificial legs after being wiped out on his bike on the M6 one day by a driver changing lanes. As the Police arrived all the car driver could say was "But I signalled, but I signalled". It was a pity he didn't check his mirrors as a Suzuki GT750 with its headlight on makes a pretty big thing to miss.....if you look properly.

re multi lane roads; I was taught that if you are moving inside to outside, then you should indicate. If you are moving outside to inside then you don't need to (as traffic should always be as inside as possible) - but it's always best to indicate anyway.



Inside lane car will have seen the car in the outside lane, it should know that traffic should keep to the inside so knows that it needs to signal it's intentions.

What you were taught was correct certainly in the purest form of theory, and at one time I'd have agreed wholeheartedly with that. But, you have to take into account human nature, not to mention human error. A driver should, in theory be expected to move back to the left after an overtake, but observation, forward as well as to the rear is, yet again the watchword. A comment was made elsewhere on FF that a blind spot check shouldn't be necessary as mirror checks should suffice, if done properly. I have to agree with that but it takes a lot of self discipline to do it.

 

[jip0]

My argument against signalling all the time is that it is pure laziness. The major consideration before any change of speed or direction, with the possible exception of emergency braking, is observation. Those that signal automatically tend to use the signal as a safety net which means they don't use their mirrors enough. How many times do you see a car signal then start to change lanes only for the driver to realise at the last second there's another vehicle overtaking them? A friend of mine, after spending three years in a wheelchair manages to get round quite well on his artificial legs after being wiped out on his bike on the M6 one day by a driver changing lanes. As the Police arrived all the car driver could say was "But I signalled, but I signalled". It was a pity he didn't check his mirrors as a Suzuki GT750 with its headlight on makes a pretty big thing to miss.....if you look properly.

i never said anything about not checking mirrors

i just said its habit to signal because it is for me, i check my mirror, signal and go as i was taught (MSN)

assuming its safe to go of course

 

[The Beard]

i never said anything about not checking mirrors

i just said its habit to signal because it is for me, i check my mirror, signal and go as i was taught (MSN)

assuming its safe to go of course

In that case I'd like to shake your hand becuse you're one of the very few who do. Well done, and before you ask, I'm not being patronising I mean it.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

i never said anything about not checking mirrors

i just said its habit to signal because it is for me, i check my mirror, signal and go as i was taught (MSN)

assuming its safe to go of course

Ditto. My Lane changes = mirror, signal, blind spot, manovour.

And there have been a hand full of occasions in my 5 years of driving where the blind spot check has prevented a smash. Would never not do it myself.

 

[dombooth]

Er, yes it does. If you didn't learn about apexes, vanishing points, understeer, oversteer, adverse cambers, sight lines, direction of lamp posts the meaning of SLOW road markings not to mention quantities of signs and road markings then you had a crap instructor. Get a decent one and do it again. Unless of course you know it all.

Why would I want to waste money on doing it again..? No-one I know has learn about all that in PP.

I drive by IPSGA
Information
Position
Speed
Gear
Acceleration.

Dom

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

Why would I want to waste money on doing it again..? No-one I know has learn about all that in PP.

I drive by IPSGA
Information
Position
Speed
Gear
Acceleration.

Dom

Sounds like you were all unfortunate to have crap instructors then. Went through a lot of extra stuff on my PP although I already knew a lot of it I lernt a few extra bits that I use fairly regularly

 

[The Beard]

Why would I want to waste money on doing it again..? No-one I know has learn about all that in PP.

I drive by IPSGA
Information
Position
Speed
Gear
Acceleration.

Dom

That sounds a little IAM-ish/ROSPA-ish to me. Not that that's a particularly bad thing but those groups, predominantly the IAM, in the last few years seem to have filled up with people who either know little about the subject or are dying to get out from the straight jacket of IAM dogma.

The question about re-taking your Pass Plus was largely rhetorical.

Here's a question for FF members.....What is the meaning of the word SLOW on the road? If you don't know, your instructor wasn't very good.

Here's another one. Bit easier this one. What is the relationship between a hazard and the type and quantity of road markings?

 

[dombooth]

IAM.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

Here's a question for FF members.....What is the meaning of the word SLOW on the road? If you don't know, your instructor wasn't very good.

An on a similar note, a lot of people seem to think that certain lines in the middle of the road are only there to be a divide between the oncoming traffic.

 

[richydraper]

i still think people should ride before they drive... if they dont survive say a year on a scooter/bike then they shouldnt have been allowed in a car anyway.

ive ridden for 4 years and driven for 6 i still find myself looking way into the distance for clues as to whats going on something i picked up from the bike and numerous passengers have asked why i roll off the throttle soo early... then as the traffic in front jams their anchors on because they are looking 6inches in front of their bumper i have plenty of time to brake gently.

roads are dangerous... fact
people are stupid... fact

i know professional drivers of 30years+ that are still amazed and gobsmacked at what some people deem is correct road etiquet. it doesnt surprise me that cars are collected by trucks regularly and it doesnt surprise me that people drive like tits bumping insurances prices up and making the run to work a chuffing gauntlet.

town commuting is way worse than motorway commuting i had to use the horn/take evasive action more times in one morning taking the wife to work last week because her car broke then i have in a year on the motorways.

goddamit people cant even navigate a road with 2 rows of parked cars nowadays without hitting something. i agree with this learners on motorways IF theyre taught right in the first place and IF they carry on to drive correctly. but i think a run around town in rush hour would be much more beneficial.

but if you ask me momsie taking rupert and hermione in an x5 to school should stay the funk at home, just because you have a larger car than mine dont think you can push me off the road because you know what... i wont shift, i WILL get your details and you WILL get a torrent of abuse with ever so slight pangs of sarcasm questioning why your need to be in my lane is greater than mine!

driving standards have slipped exponentially in the last few years (and probably many more) to the point that i sold my bike because with a baby on the way i wanted her to actually have a father and not be left wondering why the other kids at school have a man living with them when she just has an upset mummy.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

then as the traffic in front jams their anchors on because they are looking 6inches in front of their bumper i have plenty of time to brake gently.

I don't even have to brake at times, now that eco driving and reading the road