|
It wasn't after the last accident there.I think it about time to stop learner drivers driving other than in a registerd driving school car.
|
"about time to stop learner drivers driving other than in a registerd driving school car"
I think the UK is unusual in being one of only a few countries that allow you to drive without proper driving school supervision. Certainly can?t in Poland, they find the concept shocking.
|
|
|
It wasn't after the last accident there.I think it about time to stop learner drivers driving other than in a registerd driving school car.
People need to practice in privately owned cars, otherwise the costing of learning to drive could become prohibitively expensive.
Perhaps a better idea would be to stop learner drivers from carrying passengers, apart from their instructor?
|
Maybe it being "prohibitively expensive" would make people, especially 17 year old children, realise that driving is a difficult, dangerous activity and not just an adolescent rite of passage.
|
Maybe it being "prohibitively expensive" would make people, especially 17 year old children, realise that driving is a difficult, dangerous activity and not just an adolescent rite of passage.
Well put
|
|
|
Interestingly, recent accident experience has thrown up an unexpected and unwelcome effect of the driving test getting harder. Whereas previously a reasonable proportion of young drivers would get their licenses fairly soon after turning 17, nowadays it take sa lot longer, is a lot more expensive and a lot harder to get.
You'd think that this would be good. Less inexperienced drivers on the road, newly qualified drivers have more experience etc.
What's actually happening (I believe) is that there are several undesirable knock on effects. Firstly, in any group there are likley to be only one or two who have a licence. So, they always have to drive, increasing the temptation to have a drink anyway. Secondly, they drive in a full car, often showing off to their friends, and don't have the experience to realise how differently a full, heavy car responds when sudden action needs to be taken.
So, the upshot is a massive increase in accidents involving a full car with lots of young kids in it. The overall death toll is up significantly. There was a Telegraph (I think) article on this, suggesting that perhaps the number of passengers that could ba carried in the first couple of years should be limited, along with some sort of curfew arrangement.
I offer no judgement, other than to note the laws of unintended consequence..
Gord.
|
An interesting post Gordon M.
I think a few people on here will strongly disagree with the idea that the driving test is getting more difficult. Not so long ago (and quite frequently before) it is suggested the test was far too easy and that essentially any nitwit can get one. Because I haven't experienced any more driving tests other than the one I sat in '03 at the age of 17, I can't quantifiably say driving tests are getting easier (or harder for that matter). However, the chances are, those who say the driving test is too easy, sat theirs 10 or more years ago when the test didn't include the multiple additional hurdles which have been introduced since, like hazard perception and "show me, tell me" tests, not to mention increases in traffic.
I can understand your point regarding one or two members of a group of friends being the only one with a license, because that is the case with me and my friends. Luckily, me and my friends are quite mature and fully understand the dangers of the road, defiantly not the ?show-off? type of people. Unfortunately, we?re discriminated against financially with astronomical insurance costs. However, I?m not sure that many incidents with young drivers also involve many passengers. In the case of young people I know, more often that not, the drivers were in on their own when they crashed.
Yes, passenger numbers may play a part, but I don?t think its significant enough to warrant a limit on passenger numbers or a curfew.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The local council had planned to reduce the speed limit from 60 to 40 on this piece of road, but it is still at the planning stage. Whats the bets that it will be in force within the month!
I read that the lower 40mph limit had already been approved and will be started in August.
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
I'd suggest a half-way house option, that learners should only drive a car with the supervising licence holder, and no-one else in the car as a passenger. Whenever I sat in the left seat with my daughter driving, and rear passengers (normally her younger sisters) she was very easily distracted, and even more reluctant to take my advice/instructions.
The L driver in the accident had four passengers, one of whom should have been supervising him. It is possible that the accident is partly the fault of the supervising driver.
|
I was not aware that the driver of the Escort was a learner driver. Andy has put his finger on a ridiculous loophole that badly needs to be closed. But we don't know the facts of the condition of the Escort. For example, we don't know if a front spring snapped, pierced a front tyre and flung the Escort into the Prius. If this is the case and the spring was weakened by a kerb or speed hump we will probably never know because the people in charge would rather impose more measures on us than admit that the measures they had already imposed caused six deaths. Failures of European made coil springs are now alarmingly common.
HJ
|
>>I think it about timeto stop learner drivers driving other than in a registerd driving school car.
It's my perception, and I don't have any numbers to back this up, that people under tuition aren't a big problem. By and large, they pootle around our towns, making fists of their three point turns and burning clutches out doing hill starts, but not usually hurting anyone.
I think it's the period imediately after they have passed their test that young drivers pose the most danger - when there's a carful heading to/from the evening's attraction that you are more likely to see serious accidents.
Does anyone have access to the appropriate stats? Are L-plate drivers a significant danger?
I think that having the freedom to learn in any car, with an appropriate supervisor is one that we shouldn't wish away. (At this rate, there won't be many freedoms left soon!)
Number_Cruncher
|
|
Guess we'll have to wait for the inquests.
|
|
It's too easy to generalise. Having passengers in the car has the advantage that the learner gets to experience what a loaded car feels like in terms of handling and braking distances. The 17 year old son of a friend drives faultlessly, I would be happy to lend him any car of mine.
|
|
|
|
It's my perception, and I don't have any numbers to back this up, that people under tuition aren't a big problem. By and large, they pootle around our towns, making fists of their three point turns and burning clutches out doing hill >>starts, but not usually hurting anyone.
The problem is too much driving test time is wasted doing mostly irrelevant things like 3 point turns, reversing around corners for the sake of it.
|
|
|
|
"If the spring was weakened by a kerb or speed hump, we will probably never know because the people in charge would rather impose more measures on us"
Sorry, HJ - there are umpteen possible explanations for this collision. I don't think you need give vent to your personal hates until we learn more about what actually happened.
|
As a young (20y/o), responsible driver who covers around 12,000 miles a year, I don't agree with what I'm reading. Far more dangerous than the learners are the old "flat-cap brigade" who drive erratically, can't use roundabouts, can't indicate etc etc.
Maybe there'd be less of THEM about if we all had to retake some sort of test (theory?) every 5 or 10 years. Things change on the road - how many 4-lane roundabouts with traffic lights were there when some of the more mature drivers learnt?!
Anyway, who knows what condition the car was in at the time of the accident. Can't people accept that it was an accident, unfortunate as it may be.
|
As a young (20y/o), responsible driver who covers around 12,000 miles a year, I don't agree with what I'm reading. Far more dangerous than the learners are the old "flat-cap brigade" who drive erratically, can't use roundabouts, can't indicate etc etc.
But you can't get away from the fact that young, male drivers are highly likely to cause accidents.
|
|
|
GS - your comments don't tie in with the experience of insurance companies, who have all the accident/claims data to hand. Why elese would men under 24 be charged at least four times the amount for TPFT insurance compared to a man in his 40s?
Flat cap brigade might annoy you, but they don't drive four/five up after a long night in the clubs.
|
|
|
|
|
Deaths amongst young people have doubled in the last 10 years. Fewer have licences so cars are more likely to be full. Also more and more young people drive without a licence which again is adding to the danger.
This accident occured in the wet and below the existing speed limit. The driver lost control on a bend it seems. (investigating officer is known to me via another site) Sadly everyone thinks driving below the limit will always be safe but it just isn't the case. As usual their answer is to drop the limit for one hazard rather than re-engineering the road or marking the corner as dangerous and putting some sort of indication to the inexperienced they have to slow down. This is a massive failure in education of young drivers and education of everyone as people should understand they have to drive to the conditions not to the limits.
The issue of suspension damage is pertinent as humps can and do cause serious damage. If you don't understand how cars behave when full or when suspension is a bit ropey then you will crash. I had shock absorber failure on my car due to humps. I noticed it as I could feel the car leaning more than it should. Old shocks are also lethal on uneven roads. The roads are in appalling condition and just make the problem worse. Several young people around here have all died on country roads and on dual carriageways and it is usually on bends which are bumpy. Unfortunately there was an oncoming vehicle when the escort driver lost control as otherwise they would have slid off into the scenery and not really come to much harm.
A coil had snapped on my Dad's 3 year old Omega. It failed it's MOT. How many more cars are driving around with other failed components due to the combination of badly maintained roads and stupid humps?
It's time to get back to proper driver education and instil an understanding of basic physics and motion into those that drive so they understand what happens when they drive down an uneven road surface and how vehicle behaviour changes when there are more people in the car. You can tell the difference in handling if you are aware when you have more petrol in the car. In a light car you notice even with a couple of gallons difference.
Compulsory minimum professional instruction is probably a good idea. If you make it around 8 hours then it isn't prohibitively expensive for most (car ownership is very expensive in comparison) and you will reap the benefit. Although enforced instruction and making the driving test more difficult doesn't seem to have made young people any safer. Maybe the reverse is true and now they believe if they can jump through all these hoops then they must be great drivers? Reminding them they never stop learning to improve their driving would also help.
teabelly
|
|
Re "It's time to get back to proper driver education and instil an understanding of basic physics and motion into those that drive " When did we have such a method? BTW, I've had dampers fail wothout the help of speed bumps - caused by old age! As for speed bumps causing springs to break, thats a result of ignoring the bumps and driving at 4x4 emulation speeds.
|
As for speed bumps causingsprings to break, thats a result of ignoring the bumps and driving at 4x4 emulation speeds.
cant let that pass im afraid, i certainly dont like speed bumps and still had cause to change two front springs last year after they failed while i was driving the cars.
Cars were 97 corsa
..........2001 fiesta
i actually think there were more than two?
This year ive had to change broken springs on clio and fiesta but these did come in broken.If you think its driver error with broken springs ask a factor how sales have gone up since 2001 which seems to be the year that monkey metal has been used to make springs with.
Obviously speed bumps play a part but so do potholes kerbs and overweight drivers :o
|
There are many countries in the world with worse roads than us - have even been on some rough ones in France. The problem is people who do not understand that you have to go slower if the road surface is poor (anyone else read Roadcraft?).
The hump itself does not do the damage - it is driving over it at speed which you are not meant to do.
|
|
|
|
From the speed that some people drive (not saying you!) over these horrible speed bumps, in ordinary cars, I'm not surprised the springs break. I have to regularly go to a premise which has a succession of speed bumps: some drivers go at little diminished speed over them, primarily women. I proceed with caution, as I have some mechanical sympathy.
|
GregSwain, YOU might be a responsible 20 y/o driver, but you're in a minority. Towns, cities and villages all over the UK are blighted by spotty, hormonal young men driving WAY beyond their skills and experience in stupid "modified" cars.
These cause accidents, as any insurance assessor will attest. Why do you think insurance for under-25s is prohibitive?
I am aware there are also Turbo Tracys out there, but in the main, it's the young men who do it. The girls just sit with them in the cars, being "impressed" until they grow up and realise that the "bad boys" in the Saxos are not the knights in shining armour that they hoped!
Sorry to tar YOU Greg, on a personal level I don't, but any insurance company will..
|
Road springs shouldn't break. Car suspension is designed to absorb bumps. Provided the car is driven at a speed that doesn't make the sump hit the road either on or after the speed bump, it seems to me not to matter how fast people drive over them. The car may break, but it shouldn't.
Several posters have taken the lofty line that some drivers 'don't understand' that you have to go slowly over bumps and through potholes. Obviously if you see something that's going to damage your tyres, you slow to an appropriate speed. Otherwise this is just rubbish. Some of these idiots slow, when entering a cobbled street, to the exact speed at which every cobble and bump makes itself fully felt, shaking all the relays in the car loose at the same time. The correct speed over cobbles is as fast as possible. That smooths them out.
But people are idiots unfortunately. About three out of five anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
