Two days ago a colleague was in collision with a young chap in a Saxo. My colleague was driving a Honda with front and side airbags at about 50mph. The driver of the Saxo coming toward him round a gentle bend lost it totally, rolled it and collided with the front of the Honda. The Saxo rolled over onto it's wheels and left the Honda with the engine touching the windscreen. Both parties walked away from the accident despite the Saxo having a collapsed roof. The Saxo driver was about 20 or younger and the other is 48.
It says a great deal for the integrity of modern vehicles. In conversation with my colleague we wondered if the safety equipment in modern cars encourages drivers to take risks not appreciating the dangers as much we did when an accident usually ended in us being badly hurt or choking on rust dust!
Allied to the risk is the aggression, or we think so anyway.
What do you think? Robin
Extra safety - less caution- more aggression
Moderator: RichardW
-
DervDonkey
- Posts: 65
- Joined: 25 Oct 2004, 01:08
- Location: United Kingdom
- My Cars:
In the days when I started driving ( mid 80s ), we all used to moan/joke about Volvo drivers and what t0$$ers they were. Now everything comes with built in scaffolding and enough pyrotechnic gimmickry to take out a bank vault, the average Joe/Josephine now drives this way. After all, "the car has a 5 star Euro NCAP rating, I'm insured, so I can pretty much do what I like as long as I don't drive too fast past one of those flashy thingies..."
The general standard of driving is now abysmal. It doesn't surprise me in the least that fatalities on the road are on the increase. Some little things that happened to me last night on a short (6 mile) drive to the shops:
Following a Focus, which slowed down, stopped, and turned right into a side street - without even a single flash of amber or any sign of a hand signal. This is becoming a regular occurrence.
Dual carriageway. I'm in the overtaking lane about to pass an HGV, when the car behind it just sort of drifts out right in front of me - no signal, no warning. That earned him a few seconds of main beam, and he swerved violently back in, just missing the back of the lorry - and turning on his indicator at the same time!
On the way back, I passed about 5 cars going the opposite direction. All dipped their lights for me, but 3 of them went back to main beam before passing me - are 3 out of 5 drivers almost blind? I don't see the need for main beam at all on that particular road...
Add to this the fog lamp morons, those who don't have a clue what brakes are for and when to use them, and general bad observation skills, I've come to the conclusion that it's now necessary for all drivers, without exception, to be retested at least every 5 years. Although the practicalities of this might prove to be a problem!
The general standard of driving is now abysmal. It doesn't surprise me in the least that fatalities on the road are on the increase. Some little things that happened to me last night on a short (6 mile) drive to the shops:
Following a Focus, which slowed down, stopped, and turned right into a side street - without even a single flash of amber or any sign of a hand signal. This is becoming a regular occurrence.
Dual carriageway. I'm in the overtaking lane about to pass an HGV, when the car behind it just sort of drifts out right in front of me - no signal, no warning. That earned him a few seconds of main beam, and he swerved violently back in, just missing the back of the lorry - and turning on his indicator at the same time!
On the way back, I passed about 5 cars going the opposite direction. All dipped their lights for me, but 3 of them went back to main beam before passing me - are 3 out of 5 drivers almost blind? I don't see the need for main beam at all on that particular road...
Add to this the fog lamp morons, those who don't have a clue what brakes are for and when to use them, and general bad observation skills, I've come to the conclusion that it's now necessary for all drivers, without exception, to be retested at least every 5 years. Although the practicalities of this might prove to be a problem!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DervDonkey</i>
I've come to the conclusion that it's now necessary for all drivers, without exception, to be retested at least every 5 years. Although the practicalities of this might prove to be a problem!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Well, im a relatively new driver (4 years in March) and anually get insulted by insurance quotes that only seem to care about my age. And i totally agree about retests. There is a huge trend for young drivers to drive like there on there own private race track, far to many drivers who think there the only thing on the road and way too many who just dont have a clue!
I'd love to see a driving safety test every 5 years, not a retest as we don't all want to drive like we did the day we passed our tests generally not having a clue, but a test that takes excessively agressive driver, non indicating drivers and those who never look or think removed from the roads. But it wont ever happen, why, road tax and fines bring in too much money!
And as for the Focus not indicating, how are you surprised? New Fords' arent fitted with indicators! Next time you go out driving take notice, and you'll be just at the point where your thinking 'maybe Vanny is right and they dont have indicators' which is the point they then perform an emergency skid, put the hazards on and go to the shop/cash point/takeaway!
I'd love to drive in the states, there are so few cars on the road by comparison. You can do things like overtake and everything!
I've come to the conclusion that it's now necessary for all drivers, without exception, to be retested at least every 5 years. Although the practicalities of this might prove to be a problem!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Well, im a relatively new driver (4 years in March) and anually get insulted by insurance quotes that only seem to care about my age. And i totally agree about retests. There is a huge trend for young drivers to drive like there on there own private race track, far to many drivers who think there the only thing on the road and way too many who just dont have a clue!
I'd love to see a driving safety test every 5 years, not a retest as we don't all want to drive like we did the day we passed our tests generally not having a clue, but a test that takes excessively agressive driver, non indicating drivers and those who never look or think removed from the roads. But it wont ever happen, why, road tax and fines bring in too much money!
And as for the Focus not indicating, how are you surprised? New Fords' arent fitted with indicators! Next time you go out driving take notice, and you'll be just at the point where your thinking 'maybe Vanny is right and they dont have indicators' which is the point they then perform an emergency skid, put the hazards on and go to the shop/cash point/takeaway!
I'd love to drive in the states, there are so few cars on the road by comparison. You can do things like overtake and everything!
-
uhn113x
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: 06 Jan 2004, 22:06
- Location: Near Leeds, United Kingdom
- My Cars: 1981 Dyane - on road all year round.
1982 GSA Pallas - on road April - September.
1997 ZX 1.9D Dimension. - x 1
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by vanny</i>
And as for the Focus not indicating, how are you surprised? New Fords' arent fitted with indicators!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Think they are, Vanny - they usually indicate 'right' as they leave a roundabout! [}:)]
I agree with everyone's views on this thread; it is something I have been saying for a while. The 5-year retest is a good idea, but it should be a psychometric screening; this should also be included as part of the initial test; any sign of a short fuse, and you do not get a licence at all. Harsh, I know, but it is a problem that needs urgent attention, and not by putting more and more scaffold poles and whoopee cushions in cars.
And as for the Focus not indicating, how are you surprised? New Fords' arent fitted with indicators!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Think they are, Vanny - they usually indicate 'right' as they leave a roundabout! [}:)]
I agree with everyone's views on this thread; it is something I have been saying for a while. The 5-year retest is a good idea, but it should be a psychometric screening; this should also be included as part of the initial test; any sign of a short fuse, and you do not get a licence at all. Harsh, I know, but it is a problem that needs urgent attention, and not by putting more and more scaffold poles and whoopee cushions in cars.
-
martyhopkirk
I agree - I took my motorbike test about 5 years after my car test, and was surprised about how much I re-learned.
I also feel that people should have a bash on 2 wheels at least once in their life as a motorist - it gives you far more consideration for other road users, not just bikers.
Psychometric screening..... Hmmmm.... best hide that baseball bat under the seat then.
I also feel that people should have a bash on 2 wheels at least once in their life as a motorist - it gives you far more consideration for other road users, not just bikers.
Psychometric screening..... Hmmmm.... best hide that baseball bat under the seat then.
-
oilyspanner
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: 26 Oct 2003, 16:08
- Location: United Kingdom
- My Cars:
Anyone with six license points should be made to drive a Reliant Robin on crossply tyres with a ten inch spike sticking out of the steering wheel. Human beings are good at managing risk, we all have a degree of risk we are prepared to accept, add ABS, whoopee cushions, scaffolding poles to the car and we feel safer, ergo we drive faster in order to get to the level of risk we are prepared to accept, this process however only seems to kick in in our mid twenties or so, until that time we are of course immortal and indestructible. Modern motors are more idiot proof though not totally.
Stewart
Stewart
-
Stinkwheel
- Posts: 562
- Joined: 28 May 2004, 01:02
- Location:
- My Cars:
- x 1
Oilyspanner you have something there (best see a doctor) but no really.
I proved to myself recently your theory about self preservation kicking in, and yes mid twenties is about right. When i was 16 i had my first bike, at 17 i got my first proper bike, before i was 18 had progressed through 8 different bikes and onto a modern sport 600 at 18 I brought a modern sports 750. I was indestructable, I rode hard, i was in the bike trade i had a lot of miles under my belt and without sounding big headed i was actually quite good. I met and moved in with my then girlfriend at 21, time passed, we married bought house etc, i gave up bikes, changed jobs. 5 years later i brought a bike again. so basically 5 years off the road, it was a model i was familiar with and had some experiance of so knew what it would/would not do. Do i ride like i used to? Not not even close, am i really quite pedestrian, yes. Do i question my ability to ever ride like that again, yes and I dont think i will. Sense just kicks in one day. The break topped it off for me, if i hadnt stopped riding it probably would have been a gradual decline in hoologanism not a total drop off. Its Something i think we have all experianced, but youth or the younger of today do not all seem to have this happen as i have. This worries me, be afraid, be very afraid.
I proved to myself recently your theory about self preservation kicking in, and yes mid twenties is about right. When i was 16 i had my first bike, at 17 i got my first proper bike, before i was 18 had progressed through 8 different bikes and onto a modern sport 600 at 18 I brought a modern sports 750. I was indestructable, I rode hard, i was in the bike trade i had a lot of miles under my belt and without sounding big headed i was actually quite good. I met and moved in with my then girlfriend at 21, time passed, we married bought house etc, i gave up bikes, changed jobs. 5 years later i brought a bike again. so basically 5 years off the road, it was a model i was familiar with and had some experiance of so knew what it would/would not do. Do i ride like i used to? Not not even close, am i really quite pedestrian, yes. Do i question my ability to ever ride like that again, yes and I dont think i will. Sense just kicks in one day. The break topped it off for me, if i hadnt stopped riding it probably would have been a gradual decline in hoologanism not a total drop off. Its Something i think we have all experianced, but youth or the younger of today do not all seem to have this happen as i have. This worries me, be afraid, be very afraid.
whats needed are a lot more traffic coppers on the road!! Its very easy to drive or ride like a prat because you are very unlikely to get caught!!
I have been commuting between Essex and East London up and down the M11 for years, and driving standards are getting worse and worse.
I see ridiculous driving, bumper to bumper Mondeos up each others ar##s at 80, 90 mph, mr Audi who wants to go even faster, organ donor bikers weaving between the wing mirrors, dopey half asleep HGV drivers drifting over the white lines or trying to get past each other at walking pace up the hills, yet I very rarely see a motorway patrol these days-maybe once a month or so, and then only going up the hard shoulder to some accident with blue lights going.
Whats needed are a few high profile severe sentences for dangerous driving- on the spot fines for tailgating, failing to dip headlights, having fogs on when its not foggy, that sort of thing-back to basics!!!!
Its a truism that a speed camera doesn't catch a drunk or a tailgater, or white van man trying to intimidate the car in front.
When I started driving you were more or less guaranteed to be stopped for something or other on a weekly basis- I was once pulled up for accelerating too hard on an RD400, and my first traffic conviction was for "ignoring traffic signs" about 1978 I think-I went the wrong side of a keep left bollard to beat the traffic ,on an RD200, was pulled up by two bike cops and ended up being fined a tenner-eee, it was a lot of money in them days.....now when was the last time you heard of anyone being nicked for this sort of thing?
Going back to oilyspanners point about the 6 point offender, these will only be people dumb enough not to see the speed camera, they won't be the tailgater, the under-taker, or the distracted phone yapper- they can only be caught by good old fashioned sarcy traffic coppers, which we aint got no more!!!!!!
I have been commuting between Essex and East London up and down the M11 for years, and driving standards are getting worse and worse.
I see ridiculous driving, bumper to bumper Mondeos up each others ar##s at 80, 90 mph, mr Audi who wants to go even faster, organ donor bikers weaving between the wing mirrors, dopey half asleep HGV drivers drifting over the white lines or trying to get past each other at walking pace up the hills, yet I very rarely see a motorway patrol these days-maybe once a month or so, and then only going up the hard shoulder to some accident with blue lights going.
Whats needed are a few high profile severe sentences for dangerous driving- on the spot fines for tailgating, failing to dip headlights, having fogs on when its not foggy, that sort of thing-back to basics!!!!
Its a truism that a speed camera doesn't catch a drunk or a tailgater, or white van man trying to intimidate the car in front.
When I started driving you were more or less guaranteed to be stopped for something or other on a weekly basis- I was once pulled up for accelerating too hard on an RD400, and my first traffic conviction was for "ignoring traffic signs" about 1978 I think-I went the wrong side of a keep left bollard to beat the traffic ,on an RD200, was pulled up by two bike cops and ended up being fined a tenner-eee, it was a lot of money in them days.....now when was the last time you heard of anyone being nicked for this sort of thing?
Going back to oilyspanners point about the 6 point offender, these will only be people dumb enough not to see the speed camera, they won't be the tailgater, the under-taker, or the distracted phone yapper- they can only be caught by good old fashioned sarcy traffic coppers, which we aint got no more!!!!!!
-
Homer
- Posts: 1503
- Joined: 26 Feb 2003, 10:52
- Location: Yorkshire
- My Cars: Current:
Volvo V60 D4 180
Previous:
BX16RS (two of),
BX19TZI,
Xantia 2.0i saloon,
Xantia 2.0 Exclusive CT turbo Break,
Peugeot 807 2.0 HDi 110,
Renault Grand Scenic, 2.0 diesel (150bhp)
C5 X7 2.0 HDi 160 which put me off French cars possibly forever - x 16
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Robin</i>
It says a great deal for the integrity of modern vehicles. In conversation with my colleague we wondered if the safety equipment in modern cars encourages drivers to take risks not appreciating the dangers as much we did when an accident usually ended in us being badly hurt or choking on rust dust!
Allied to the risk is the aggression, or we think so anyway.
What do you think? Robin
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This idea comes up time and time again ans seems plausable at first.
The trouble with the theory is. How do you know how much an accident will hurt unless you have been in one? I really doubt all the agressive drivers have had a smash, walked away and thought "that was fun I'll do it again".
It says a great deal for the integrity of modern vehicles. In conversation with my colleague we wondered if the safety equipment in modern cars encourages drivers to take risks not appreciating the dangers as much we did when an accident usually ended in us being badly hurt or choking on rust dust!
Allied to the risk is the aggression, or we think so anyway.
What do you think? Robin
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This idea comes up time and time again ans seems plausable at first.
The trouble with the theory is. How do you know how much an accident will hurt unless you have been in one? I really doubt all the agressive drivers have had a smash, walked away and thought "that was fun I'll do it again".
-
martyhopkirk
Was pulled up in 1989 for running a red light at 2 am by an unmarked car - lef hand filter lane and i had never ever known it to be anything other than green! And at 2am you just dont expect an umarked car to follow you to the next set of lights (300yds) and then for a copper to knock on your window.... Put the fear of god into me! Scary copper tactics work.
Next time I was pulled was a few weeks ago in the ZX - thats 15 years and about 240,000 miles without a tug. Worrying really as I know I myself have done silly things (especially on 2 wheels when i thought myself invincible). So how many more people slip the net.
If you knew the number of people who drive whilst under the influence of a class A drug, it would make your teeth itch. Yet they get away with it - more so than drink drivers. If you are on a methadone or subutex programme you need to inform the DVLA who will revoke your license and give you a 12 month one subject to regular medicals - if you want to drive a HGV or PSV - forget it. Yet there are plenty who do, believe me, and fail to inform the DVLA - not only commiting a motoring offence but invalidating their insurance also.
I agree - more propper policemen (and women) doing a propper job rather than yellow boxes and vans with cameras - Do they catch the drivers with bald tyres?
On a lighter note - I did see a bike cop forcing a driver to change his wheel which was bald with his spare at the side of the road one wet Tuesday - I wonder if he booked him too, or whether he felt that the motorist getting cold and wet was punishment enough?
I believe 6 points on your licence now within 3 years of passing your test earns an instant ban and forces you to take your test again.
Next time I was pulled was a few weeks ago in the ZX - thats 15 years and about 240,000 miles without a tug. Worrying really as I know I myself have done silly things (especially on 2 wheels when i thought myself invincible). So how many more people slip the net.
If you knew the number of people who drive whilst under the influence of a class A drug, it would make your teeth itch. Yet they get away with it - more so than drink drivers. If you are on a methadone or subutex programme you need to inform the DVLA who will revoke your license and give you a 12 month one subject to regular medicals - if you want to drive a HGV or PSV - forget it. Yet there are plenty who do, believe me, and fail to inform the DVLA - not only commiting a motoring offence but invalidating their insurance also.
I agree - more propper policemen (and women) doing a propper job rather than yellow boxes and vans with cameras - Do they catch the drivers with bald tyres?
On a lighter note - I did see a bike cop forcing a driver to change his wheel which was bald with his spare at the side of the road one wet Tuesday - I wonder if he booked him too, or whether he felt that the motorist getting cold and wet was punishment enough?
I believe 6 points on your licence now within 3 years of passing your test earns an instant ban and forces you to take your test again.
safer cars are bad news on pedestrians to, when i was at school (80's groan) one of my teachers belonged to this strange group campaigning against compulsary seat beat laws....he didnt even drive him and his mates had plotted accident trends and could show that as drivers wore seatbelts they felt safer so drove faster and crashed into pedestrians more. We thought he was talking crap at first but the statistics he had did support his argument. the safer people feel the faster and more carelesly they drive
The driving test should be far more stringent than it is and penalties for ar5eing about on the road should be stiffer. I have to take a re=assessment at work every year, equivalent to the civillian advanced test with some extra bits chucked in, and I don't see why all drivers shouldn't do the same. After all, our cars are re tested every year for safety, yet the most safety critical component (the driver) is left to get on with it until their 70th birthday. Whay?
-
Ragandbone
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 07 Dec 2004, 15:50
- Location: United Kingdom
- My Cars:
In the doctors surgery where I am on the books there's a price list on the wall for people who need to prove they are healthy to drive- HGV drivers, people who want racing licences, PSV drivers, that sort of thing.
There are two scales of charges for a certificate-expensive if you have a full medical, half the price if its done from the notes file without even seeing you!!!!
I wonder what most people go for..............?
There are two scales of charges for a certificate-expensive if you have a full medical, half the price if its done from the notes file without even seeing you!!!!
I wonder what most people go for..............?
-
DervDonkey
- Posts: 65
- Joined: 25 Oct 2004, 01:08
- Location: United Kingdom
- My Cars:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have to take a re=assessment at work every year, equivalent to the civillian advanced test with some extra bits chucked in, and I don't see why all drivers shouldn't do the same.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Because I doubt that any system (especially a government-created one) could cope with the volume. I don't know offhand exactly how many licensed drivers there are in the UK, but it must be around 25 million (give or take a few million) which means they would need to do about 68000 assessments every <i>day</i>. Not taking public holidays, industrial action etc. into account. Assuming an average 30 minutes per assessment, that would require 4250 testers working 8 hours a day, seven days a week, at a cost of some £106million - guess who pays? OK, it's only a fiver per test, but when the bureaucracy gets its teeth into the pie and the chancellor's sticky fingers reach out, it'll be more like £50. Just my quick mental calculation, probably wrong anyway.
I still think a 5 year assessment/test is necessary - any more often than that and it would start to be a pain in the @rse for most people, and of course, you could do the same thing as is done with MOT tests - that is, allow people to sit their assessment (say) a year before it's actually due and have the result valid for 6 years which would give the failed ones some time to come up to scratch... Or maybe that's a bad idea?
Because I doubt that any system (especially a government-created one) could cope with the volume. I don't know offhand exactly how many licensed drivers there are in the UK, but it must be around 25 million (give or take a few million) which means they would need to do about 68000 assessments every <i>day</i>. Not taking public holidays, industrial action etc. into account. Assuming an average 30 minutes per assessment, that would require 4250 testers working 8 hours a day, seven days a week, at a cost of some £106million - guess who pays? OK, it's only a fiver per test, but when the bureaucracy gets its teeth into the pie and the chancellor's sticky fingers reach out, it'll be more like £50. Just my quick mental calculation, probably wrong anyway.
I still think a 5 year assessment/test is necessary - any more often than that and it would start to be a pain in the @rse for most people, and of course, you could do the same thing as is done with MOT tests - that is, allow people to sit their assessment (say) a year before it's actually due and have the result valid for 6 years which would give the failed ones some time to come up to scratch... Or maybe that's a bad idea?