Donate SIGN UP

Would G D Ls Be Effective ?

Avatar Image
Canary42 | 21:37 Thu 27th Sep 2018 | Motoring
46 Answers
GDL = Graduated Driving Licence. (e.g. after passing Driving Test, progress up to full licence is based on experience.)

See link for one point of view (obviously driven by very tragic circumstances), but the item includes some thoughts on how effective GDLs might be.

Let's hear a few AB views.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-45627115

[One could also argue for some of the recommended restrictions to also begin to phase in with very elderly drivers, e.g. maximum speed, night driving, etc., but that's a topic for another thread]

Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 46rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
Wouldn't the "black box" system be better? that allows drivers to continue to gain the all important experience but being monitored at the same time. They also get more realistic insurance.
08:24 Fri 28th Sep 2018
yes prudie, because bikers are more exposed. Look up the figures of who caused the accidents and you'll see a very low percentage caused by bikers.
TTT what a load of nonsense. I am a safe and competent car driver but couldn't balance any kind of bike....and what about drivers with disabilities?
I very much agree with TTT. If fit and able to lean to ride a motorcyle it would be most advantageous in later driving abilities. Once you have ridden a motorcycle you are quickly aware how vulnerable a motorcyclist and pedal cyclists are to other road users. This should,hopefully, make a 4 wheeled driver more aware of other vehicles. I accept not all are able to ride a motorcycle for various reasons. I have taken about twenty driving tests in my driving life,not because of failure but for advancement on both cars,motorcycles,HGVs and PSVs plus other specialist driving techniques. I don't think the standard of driving we now see on our roads can get much worse.
I took my son out for a drive for a check test prior to his driving exam. His instructor said he was ready for the test. He was not and failed twice before obtaining a full licence.
I asked him to show me a 3 point turn. He had never done one and didn't know what I meant. Ditto reversing around a corner keeping close and parallel to the kerb,ditto a hill start. He had no idea of speed awareness braking distances etc etc. He had never heard of the Highway Code and when I explained what it was he told me his instructor advised him to look up on the web and read the sample questions given for the theory test.
I am all for Graduated Driving Licences and at nearly 70 I welcome the requirement ,if it becomes law, to take any further testing deemed necessary.
Having passed an Advanced Driving Course at about 29 years of age having taken several progressive courses from basic I was told that statistically I would be likely to be involved in a RTC within a month.
I was fortunate. It took a while longer than that.
For a 20 year old to say they have not had a RTC then I will say .Good for you but there is plenty of time,hopefully,left for you. So don't get complacent.
Three-point turns and reversing round a corner are no longer parts of the test.
woofgang:"TTT what a load of nonsense. I am a safe and competent car driver but couldn't balance any kind of bike....and what about drivers with disabilities? " - you would if you'd had training from the start. They would have to obvious exemptions for the disabled etc.
I tried...can't do it, can't even ride a push bike......besides, there are other ways of becoming a safe and competent driver.
Three-point turns and reversing round a corner are no longer parts of the test.

Precisely and that is a good thing in your opinion????
That rather helps my point in saying that driving standards,imo,have never been worse.
What is the point of being given a licence that states you are competent to drive when your incapable of executing manoevres that are common everyday practice
No point pleading you were never taught to reverse around a corner after you have mounted the pavement and crushed a push chair is there?
Reversing round a corner isn’t an everyday experience. I doubt I do it once a year. If I had to do it, the fact that I learnt how 50 years ago would be meaningless.

To answer the OP, it sounds sensible but I’m not sure it could be usefully monitored or proved.
I didn't say the absence of three-point turn and reversing round a corner were good things. They've been left out to allow time for instruction and testing using a sat nav and following directions to get from A to B.

Is crushing a pram whilst reversing round a bend that likely?
That's the problem. Because of where I live and the kind of driving I do, I do three point turns on a regular basis. When I was working, I used to both three point turn and reverse around corners on a regular basis because of the kind of streets I did visits in. On the other hand, I never drive on motorways and rarely drive on dual carriageways. Its quite a rural area, and my hazardous driving is all about animals on the roads, agricultural vehicles, blind bends narrow roads with poor surfaces and so on. With many (most) of the roads being unlit, banning night driving at a certain age would also limit my ability to go out in winter.
//They've been left out to allow time for instruction and testing using a sat nav and following directions to get from A to B.

Is crushing a pram whilst reversing round a bend that likely?//


Do you honestly believe that the ability to use a Sat/Nav is more important than learning skills to reduce death on the road and safer driving.
Any fool can learn in their own time how to use Sat/Nav .
I would sooner be a passenger in a car with some one who can handle and control a potential lethal vehicle safely than a driver who is too thick to read a map.
Yes. A reversing vehicle crushing a push chair is very likely. I have attended two such RTCs, to my memory, as a Traffic Officer. Both young children killed.
retro, were those accidents at a time when reversing around a corner was still tested?
Unless the drivers were learners or foreign, they are likely to have been tested on that manoeuvre so it would have happened regardless.
No. Woofgang. They weren't. :-(
When did the accidents happen?
//She was travelling fast, but within the speed limit. It was wet.

As she turned a corner, she lost control of her car, and hit a van//

One can only guess. Was this unfortunate lady and others told of "The rules of breaking",how to control loss of traction, how to "off accelerator" as soon as a loss of traction manifests itself, Never touch brakes when loss of traction occurs and which way to steer when it occurs.What to do when a front tyre blows out at 70mph etc etc
I bet new drivers today have never had this subject broached with their instructors and the above example is only one of many different types of collisions.
I appreciate that not all learners have access to use a "skid pan" unless they pay for the use but at least they should be told how to avoid such emergencies.
THECORBYLOON
Is this a cross examination or an interrogation. Lay off the stalking pal.
I am giving some opinions with some examples of what Ihave experienced.
I never had those subjects broached in any of my lessons or tests and I’ve been driving for 35 years. Neither were they broached during my Advanced lessons or test (conducted by one of your fellow plod, RC)
It could only be effective if the drivers it applied to obeyed the rules, but would they?
I had great fun as a teenager. Passed my driving test nine days after my seventeenth birthday.

Used to drive downhill towards a big empty car park when it was full of snow. Slam the brakes on, full lock on, release the footbrake and see how many full circles the car would spin, great fun. ABS has ruined that little avenue of pleasure.

21 to 40 of 46rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Would G D Ls Be Effective ?

Answer Question >>