You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So, I'll start with a whinge about an unbelievable bit of driving. I was approaching a traffic calming island which was on the opposite side of the road with a give way sign and there is a cycle lane bypassing it. A car coming the other way decided not to give way as I approached so I raised my hand to say "What the hell?", which is when he pointed at the cycle lane on the opposite side of the road! I just can't even fathom what was going on in his head and in what world that would even make sense.
Anyway, after the initial utter disbelief, I was even more surprised because he was young. I have a nothing but good experiences with young drivers. Always aware at junctions, always overtake by going fully on the opposite side of the road, and no road rage incidents. I guess they must be more informed on their lessons/test these days. I remember just a passing mention when I was learning (car & motorbike), basically "Oh, also, pedestrians and cyclists exist." And zero mention of motorbikes on the car test (!?).
Anyone else have the same experience and hold out hope for the future?
I have a nothing but good experiences with young drivers.
You've clearly not come across the variety of young driver that drives black Corsa's with Nurbergring stickers on the boot.
Well, that's the thing, I have. I hear the ridiculous loud exhaust popping away and think "Here we go". Then they slow right down, give a wide berth and off they go leaving me to read the life changing knowledge of Paul Walker "I almost had you, man". A lot of middle aged drivers seem to think I don't exist, or shouldn't exist.
Theres a government THINK campaign recently that stated that male drivers aged 17 to 24 are four times more likely to be killed or seriously injured than drivers aged 25 or over and that 60% of all serious and fatal collisions involving young male car drivers were on rural roads. I dont hold out any hope - its a maturity thing, biologically the brain just isnt fully mature enough until after 25 to manage the high degree of skill needed to safely be in charge of 2 tonnes of fast moving metal. Easy solution - dont drive until you're 25?
Its not so much skill is it as the urge to show off...
Could be worse - you could have a lane drawn on your side of the road to make everything alright
every working day I ride past this mofo - the lane marking means that drivers feel they don't have to give way to oncoming me, as I have a separate "lane". Even if they are sticking below 30 that's a potential closing speed of 50+ (bottom of a moderate hill for the cyclist) with a few inches to spare. I've had ****ing ambulances (no blues) do it to me, never mind corsas. I go really slow now on the way downhill because you can't brake effectively at the bottom if/when you do get sight of an approaching car (almost always wed/muddy/leaves - no idea how google caught it lookig so clean)
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @50.9350759,-1.4415998,3a,75y,178.34h,74.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjL7yiccAT17xR_XyBC9w3g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Yeah, but is it an age or experience thing? Surely the majority of people pass their tests between 17-24? Maybe restrictions on power (like motorbikes), a certain amount of hours with an instructor, and/or weight limit might help. But even then, you can still drive like a dick. Maybe a certain amount of hours cycling or riding a motorbike or riding a horse on the road might give some appreciation of being a vulnerable road user.
IMO, all demographics have (some) inept drivers. In some demographics, the ineptness is lack of awareness rather than over-confidence or aggression or selfishness but it doesn't really matter as the result is still the same when a cyclist and a car collide....
Some of the driving I've seen locally is ****ing scary. I don't know what age the drivers are but driving standards seem to have dropped off a cliff. My wife today, indicating to turn right and slowing to make the turn had a car over take on her right. This is in a 20mph zone (suburban london), houses, a park and close to a school. We've also both seen insane speeding on the road, possibly 60+ in a 20, toward a crest, at school collection time. My heart was in my mouth praying no one was crofting the road past the crest.
These are extreme examples but overtaking in 20mph roads around here is the norm, along with the wrong side of traffic islands and around bends.
praying no one was crofting the road past the crest.
Sounds like bad driving is the least of your issues on the roads near you!
you could have a lane drawn on your side of the road to make everything alright
That's a bit of a shitshow there. They have painted that lane just at the traffic calming! Without that lane you could at least take a central road position without the oncoming traffic thinking "he should be in his lane, I'm coming anyway".
I'm still at a loss why every new driver doesn't have to retake a test every 5 years or so. Probably quite straightforward to implement and doesn't necessarily need cascading upwards to already licensed. Easy income stream for the government. Safer roads (probably).
Or is the motoring lobby just too strong?
Pointless, you could just drive on your best behaviour for 30-60 mins then go back to driving like a …..
Just make black box mandatory for 2 years probation period ?
Not being able to drive until you are 25 is hilariously ridiculous.
There’s plenty of 23-24yr olds with mortgages, relationships and gasp even children of their own to look after and those that haven’t aren’t in the majority lunatics behind the wheel and they probably have places to go in these cars, like their jobs.
Give it time and we will all be in semi autonomous cars with gps based speed limiters, until then accept the fact some people in lots of different demographics in lots of different types of cars drive like dicks and try to keep yourself as safe as possible out there.
Edit - black boxes can only be a good idea for fist few years of driving.
A brighter future? Not if the kids around here are anything to go by.
We live near a posh private school that in their infinite wisdom doesn’t let their 6th formers park their newly acquired cars on site, so during school hours they park everywhere in the streets around us. I say park, but abandoned is a more appropriate word. They’re left on junctions, street corners, across peoples drives, mostly on the pavement blocking pedestrians to avoid getting scratched on the road, the lot.
I assume they’ve not long passed their tests, so can’t have forgotten the Highway Code, so they’re either idiots, or self entitled assholes that don’t care.
Theres a government THINK campaign recently that stated that male drivers aged 17 to 24 are four times more likely to be killed or seriously injured than drivers aged 25 or over and that 60% of all serious and fatal collisions involving young male car drivers were on rural roads. I dont hold out any hope – its a maturity thing, biologically the brain just isnt fully mature enough until after 25 to manage the high degree of skill needed to safely be in charge of 2 tonnes of fast moving metal. Easy solution – dont drive until you’re 25?
But what proportion of those 17-24 year olds dying on rural roads end their life wrapped round a tree Vs being wiped out by the inexpertly directed inertia of a Defender under the control of an over confident 55 year old, fuelled by an extended liquid lunch and the urgency that comes from realising you're late getting the missus from the train station?
IME the scariest drivers on those rural roads are middle aged and either in big SUVs or pick-ups. If you can always give an L200 or a Navara a wide berth.
But what proportion of those 17-24 year olds dying on rural roads end their life wrapped round a tree Vs being wiped out by the inexpertly directed inertia of a Defender under the control of an over confident 55 year old
At a guess I’d say almost none.
I was even more surprised because he was young.
"Young drivers aged under 24 are facing the steepest increases in the cost of their insurance. The average premium for young drivers is now £1,640, having leapt by £510 (45%) in the past 12 months" https://www.comparethemarket.com/car-insurance/content/premium-drivers-report/
The current average premium aged 17-20 is £1800
There are several tables in the link ^^, lowest premium increases are to be found in the SW and amongst the 55-64 age group nationally
They're probably shit scared of the prospect of having to retake their test if the get 6 points in the their first two years.
And rightly so.
Pointless, you could just drive on your best behaviour for 30-60 mins then go back to driving like a …..
Agreed, but have you tried driving to test standard for 5 minutes? It's very hard once the bad habits have taken hold.
So a regular retest cannot be a bad idea.
I always wonder if the UK couldn’t do with a ‘Drivers’ Education’ system like the one we had where I grew up (Manitoba).
Here, my kids got ‘driving lessons’, whereas I had to take ‘Drivers’ Ed’, which included learning about the car, watching endless, terrifying videos of fatal car crashes, doing homework on the rules of the road, studying car control, and having a lot of hours behind the wheel with a professional instructor.
It was holistic, and really impressed on me that driving is a ‘whole life’ thing, as opposed to being just something you do by getting behind a wheel and propelling a lump of metal forward.
On top of that, I had an uncle who took us out to a frozen lake and taught us car control on ice. Of course that last bit wouldn’t be possible here, but a more thorough driving education wouldn’t go amiss.
I was dreadful as a young driver - drove everywhere too fast, sliding around roundabouts etc. BUT I would always give cyclists a wide berth, slow down for them and so on as I was a cyclist at that time also. Doesn't make me a good driver though does it....
I had an uncle who took us out to a frozen lake and taught us car control on ice.
Good idea. I spent literally all day in an empty snowy car park when I was 18 and it is a good way to learn about sliding a car around (especially when it is a Hillman Imp that cost me £25)
So a regular retest cannot be a bad idea.
For everyone. Me included. I think this should be a minimum.
Not being able to drive until you are 25 is hilariously ridiculous.
In most of the UK yes, but not London and not other countries. When I worked in Finland in a team of about 8 young people (25-30) only one of us owned a car.
On top of that, I had an uncle who took us out to a frozen lake and taught us car control on ice. Of course that last bit wouldn’t be possible here
Frozen lakes are rare but skid-pans exist.
But what proportion of those 17-24 year olds dying on rural roads end their life wrapped round a tree
Out of the people I knew of in my age group, all of them. And many more writing their cars off the same way.
Agreed, but have you tried driving to test standard for 5 minutes? It’s very hard once the bad habits have taken hold.
It's a piece of piss to drive "properly". Apart from crossing hands on the steering wheel, (that can go in the bin 🙂 ), I reckon I could pass my test anytime
Good idea. I spent literally all day in an empty snowy car park when I was 18 and it is a good way to learn about sliding a car around (especially when it is a Hillman Imp that cost me £25)
I tried the same and got threatened with the police.
"Apart from..."
The prosecution rests.
My utterly stupid unenforcable variation on the retest idea is as follows:
Someone designs an autocross type course on a disused airfield that is acheivable at 30mph by an averagely competent driver - corners, s bends, and an emergency stop at the end.
get caught speeding, you need to do that test at the speed you were caught at. £100 an entry, licescne suspended until you pass.
Get caught doing 36, its probably acheivable in a few attempts. Get caught doing 45, you might be spending thousands on professional tuition to get your licence back.
80? impossible task so de-facto lifetime ban.
Here, my kids got ‘driving lessons’, whereas I had to take ‘Drivers’ Ed’, which included learning about the car, watching endless, terrifying videos of fatal car crashes, doing homework on the rules of the road, studying car control, and having a lot of hours behind the wheel with a professional instructor.
It was holistic, and really impressed on me that driving is a ‘whole life’ thing, as opposed to being just something you do by getting behind a wheel and propelling a lump of metal forward.
On top of that, I had an uncle who took us out to a frozen lake and taught us car control on ice. Of course that last bit wouldn’t be possible here, but a more thorough driving education wouldn’t go amiss.
I'm not sure that, other than watching videos of car crashes, its that different? We have a theory test that consists of two parts with very high pass mark - one part is on the rules of the road along with some other stuff (like which tyre wear patterns suggest an over inflated tyre!), the other part is a hazard perception test (which might help with the recognising cyclists as hazards). You won't pass that without studying. Many "older" drivers would fail one or both parts if they sat it without any referesher. Then the practical test which involves driving around following the examiners directions to cover a wider range of road settings, performing specific manoeuvres to show you have good control, awareness and observation, and some GPS guided driving and some driving where nobody is telling you left/right etc and you need to think for yourself about which lane, which way etc. The practical test will also ask about where fluids go etc. DVSA say that with a qualified instructor it takes an average of 45 hrs of tuition to pass your test.
I could be persuaded that skid pan training should be a useful addition - but I think it might give exactly the wrong message to over confident young drivers who thing they are invicible.
Anyway, after the initial utter disbelief, I was even more surprised because he was young. I have a nothing but good experiences with young drivers.
I'd say bad drivers fall into a number of "groups":
- Incompetent. And I include some of the very older drivers in that group - who just aren't in proper control / awareness anymore but somehow make it through most trips unscathed.
- Zombies (people who are in autopilot and not thinking). I believe we all fall into this at least some of the time.
- Aggressive / arrogant. Classic white man van stuff. But not exclusively male.
- Showing off. Often the domain of the younger driver. I tend not to see these so much on the bike.
- Most important person in the world. On their phone, or driving and must-get-past, everyone else is an obstruction.
They are probably in order of culpability there!
Not being able to drive until you are 25 is hilariously ridiculous.
Only because we've stripped public transport back to the point it struggles to function, and don't treat active transport as a viable option.
I can't realistically see how pushing the licensing past ~18 could be workable as it creates too many problems, at 18 your expected to get a job, even if we solve the problem of commuting that still leaves the problem of driving for work. So raising the driving age by much isn't workable. Maybe a mandatory 18 until you can take a test to make lessons last a minimum of a year, and then a power/weight restriction for private use with an exemption for company vehicles.
If you can always give an L200 or a Navara a wide berth.
Comfortably the worst driven things on the country roads. Round here closely followed by Mer GLA's, which are driven by people who's ego wanted a GL, but couldn't afford one, or a GLC, or a GLB so had to cram their frustrated ego into that abomination.
I’m still at a loss why every new driver doesn’t have to retake a test every 5 years or so. Probably quite straightforward to implement and doesn’t necessarily need cascading upwards to already licensed. Easy income stream for the government. Safer roads (probably).
From an implementation standpoint it'd work better in reverse.
Bring in re-tests where they would make a difference, at 22 there's probably little point. Start with every 5 years after 60 when the tests are likely to catch deteriorating standards of practical driving.
The practical test I doubt would make much difference to 95% of people who know how to drive, but choose to be a tit. They won't close pass a cyclist on the test will they whether though incompetence or malicious.
5-year theory tests on the other hand, with questions focused on either changes to the HC or related to real world accident rates would be beneficial. It's also obviously a lot easier practically to examine a classroom of theory tests than it is 1 practical. Rough estimate to re-test every 5 years would need ~13x more capacity assuming most people wanted to keep their license for about 60 years.
My utterly stupid unenforcable variation on the retest idea is as follows:
Someone designs an autocross type course on a disused airfield that is acheivable at 30mph by an averagely competent driver – corners, s bends, and an emergency stop at the end.
get caught speeding, you need to do that test at the speed you were caught at. £100 an entry, licescne suspended until you pass.
Get caught doing 36, its probably acheivable in a few attempts. Get caught doing 45, you might be spending thousands on professional tuition to get your licence back.
80? impossible task so de-facto lifetime ban.
Basically the MOD1 bike test!
Park, reverse u-turn into the next space, slalom, accelerate round a bend, through the speed trap, swerve chicane, emergency stop before you run over the examiner.
Maybe a mandatory 18 until you can take a test to make lessons last a minimum of a year, and then a power/weight restriction for private use with an exemption for company vehicles.
The problem with arm chair regulation writing is it is based on opinion not evidence that (a) its even a problem (b) that this approach will solve the problem.
e.g. are people who pass at 17 statistically worse than those who pass at 18? would changing the rules just mean many don't start learning until nearer 18? are there more deaths from young people on high power/weight vehicles than we would expect? would changing the rules mean the people who currently crash high power/weight vehicles just drive low power vehicles dangerously? could they even be more vunerable as often low power vehicles have fewer safety features? Indeed whilst young drivers continue to be disproportionate in the casualty figures are they worse than when "we" were young or is this the usual middle aged folk trying to pull up the draw bridge behind them?
The problem with arm chair regulation writing is it is based on opinion not evidence that (a) its even a problem (b) that this approach will solve the problem.
I'd agree with your point, but the evidence is there from the motorcycle licensing that graduated licenses are workable and work.
And while you can't legislate for stupidity, you can make it a lot harder to be stupid. Round here there's a big problem with "car meets", then when the crash photos end up on facebook and the "he was a good driver, so sad" it's almost always an improbably highly strung ("tuned") BMW 1-series with no CAT (easy to spot when it's on it's roof). I've not tried personally, but I imagine it's a lot harder to flip a 1.0 corsa onto it's roof in the middle of the village!
That and we should adopt the same MOT and approval system as Germany, i.e. make it basically impossible to modify a car.
Age isn't the issue - it's the novelty and sudden freedom that's the issue!
By pushing the legal age up you are effectively cutting those who don't live in cities out of the jobs market.
It's all fine saying get a bus when one is passing every 10 minutes as opposed to twice a day or not at all in many rural communities.
driving is a ‘whole life’ thing,
Honestly, I think this is the best observation on this thread. I'm strongly of the opinion that we should be teaching life skills as part of the national curriculum. Feeding yourself, money management, etc. Driving, or at the very least road awareness, surely falls into that bucket.
Back when I was a kid we had Darth Vader on TV telling us to use the Green Cross Code. That's generations away now. Never mind the kids, kids' parents don't understand how to interact with different forms of road users.
I’d say bad drivers fall into a number of “groups”:
I'd say, pick any group and you'll find bad drivers. You'll probably find a correlation between shit drivers and vegans. The common denominator here is "people" and the rest is to some degree at least probably is confirmation bias.
Not being able to drive until you are 25 is hilariously ridiculous.
You can legally have sex aged 16. At 25 it's not implausible to be a parent to a 7-year old.
I wonder idly whether absolute age is actually the factor here. Rather than "18 to 19-year olds have the highest incident statistics," could we say instead that "people are most likely to have an incident in the first two years after passing their test"? If we raised the licence age to 40 would that change anything, or would people still drive like a t*** until the novelty wore off? There's plenty of born-again motorcyclists winding up under lorries.
Hah, simultaneous posts.
I’ve not tried personally, but I imagine it’s a lot harder to flip a 1.0 corsa onto it’s roof in the middle of the village!
You say that but,
There is certainly a point where physics outstrips driver ability, but it's more than possible to put a crap car into a hedge. (The modern Corsa is a different animal incidentally, there's a 3-pot 1.2 engine which will do 0-100km in 8.7s.)
A mate of mine's family home growing up was on a bend on a rural road. They got so accustomed to finding a Renault 5 or a Pug 205 or some such on their front lawn, on its roof rotating quietly to itself, that they got blasé about it. "Put the kettle on love, we've got another one."
So, I’ll start with a whinge about an unbelievable bit of driving. I was approaching a traffic calming island which was on the opposite side of the road with a give way sign and there is a cycle lane bypassing it. A car coming the other way decided not to give way as I approached so I raised my hand to say “What the hell?”, which is when he pointed at the cycle lane on the opposite side of the road! I just can’t even fathom what was going on in his head and in what world that would even make sense.
Anyway, after the initial utter disbelief, I was even more surprised because he was young. I have a nothing but good experiences with young drivers. Always aware at junctions, always overtake by going fully on the opposite side of the road, and no road rage incidents. I guess they must be more informed on their lessons/test these days. I remember just a passing mention when I was learning (car & motorbike), basically “Oh, also, pedestrians and cyclists exist.” And zero mention of motorbikes on the car test (!?).
Anyone else have the same experience and hold out hope for the future?
Almost identical experience yesterday. Two lanes one going left, one straight on, I'm in the right (centre if you include the oncoming traffic lane) lane, over to one side, guy overtakes me with barely 10cm to spare to my arm INTO a red light. I also shout OI!, he winds down his windows and tells me "i'm a ****, a f**cking idiot, and that I should be in the f**cking cycle lane (on the other side of the road) - he's shouting all this at me whilst I'm sat in the advance safety CYCLE lane. I tried to point out that he should give space, that overtaking got him nowhere and needlessly endangered my life and about the hierarchy or road users, but he just kept telling me to f*ck off (again and again and again) and that I was an fing idiot. He was maybe 18 and clearly had an IQ capable of being measured in CM on a VERY small ruler. In the end I rode into the cycle lane on my side of the road and left him in traffic with his mouth breathing. <br /><br />It's a real concern that we let these people drive.
If we raised the licence age to 40 would that change anything, or would people still drive like a t*** until the novelty wore off? There’s plenty of born-again motorcyclists winding up under lorries.
True, but it's dwarfed by the number of people who became sensible and gave up motorbikes.
The problem is that by any analysis, driving is incredibly dangerous.
Everyone knows commercial fishing is dangerous, about 100 deaths per 100k workers/year
Everyone knows farming is dangerous, that's about 10 per 100k per year.
Everyone know commercial diving is dangerous, that's about 5 per 100k per year.
The European average for driving is 10 deaths per 100k, per year, i.e. as dangerous as farming.
And the farmer (and fishermen) are out there working very long days, you drive 30min each way to work. There's the same chance of you being killed in that 30min than the farmer has of dying in 12 hours of trampling/crushing/mangling/exploding/poisoning/shooting ways.
It’s a piece of piss to drive “properly”. Apart from crossing hands on the steering wheel, (that can go in the bin 🙂 ), I reckon I could pass my test anytime
You can. As long as you control the steering smoothly and at the appropriate time that's it...
...the other part is a hazard perception test (which might help with the recognising cyclists as hazards)....Many “older” drivers would fail one or both parts if they sat it without any referesher.
The hazard perception test is designed for (mostly) younger, inexperienced drivers. The more experienced you are the more likely you'll fail because you spot the hazards too early for the DVSA scoring window
I could be persuaded that skid pan training should be a useful addition
It's likely to be expensive to set this up and teaches new drivers that you can't control the car within the restricted width of a UK road within your reaction time
Read the road surface and don't turn the safety systems off are the greater lessons, which are way more valuable than learning steering techniques, for example, and could be learnt by VR
The problem is that by any analysis, driving is incredibly dangerous.
Really?
Out of 577,000 deaths in 2022 just 1,711 were road fatalities: so you are over 99% likely not to die in a road accident. In the grand scheme of things, effort on reducing heart diseases, strokes, cancer, dementia, and suicides is much more effective on avoiding death in the UK. So in comparison to most ways to die, driving hardly a big deal.
The European average for driving is 10 deaths per 100k, per year, i.e. as dangerous as farming.
Really?
The EU death rate for traffic related fatalities was 4.9 per 100k. But of course the UK is by far one of the safest places to drive in the world, and in Europe, with a death rate of 2.8 per 100k. That's much safer than being an agricultural worker and similar to the fatality rate of a water industry worker.
And the farmer (and fishermen) are out there working very long days, you drive 30min each way to work.
Some very dubious statistics and logic there.
So "The problem is that by any analysis, driving is incredibly dangerous." - err, no. Just more risky than sitting around at home doing nothing.
I’d agree with your point, but the evidence is there from the motorcycle licensing that graduated licenses are workable and work.
I didn’t say it was unworkable. I said is there evidence it was needed. What proportion of young driver deaths (or deaths caused by young drivers) happened in “high powered” vehicles?
And while you can’t legislate for stupidity, you can make it a lot harder to be stupid. Round here there’s a big problem with “car meets”, then when the crash photos end up on facebook and the “he was a good driver, so sad” it’s almost always an improbably highly strung (“tuned”) BMW 1-series with no CAT (easy to spot when it’s on it’s roof). I’ve not tried personally, but I imagine it’s a lot harder to flip a 1.0 corsa onto it’s roof in the middle of the village!
ok so new rules aren’t going to solve that - if the existing ones don’t. Your problem seems to be nobody there to police the bad driving, at a well publicised event.
That and we should adopt the same MOT and approval system as Germany, i.e. make it basically impossible to modify a car.
again, what proportion of KSIs in the U.K. involve vehicles that have been modified?
It’s a piece of piss to drive “properly”. Apart from crossing hands on the steering wheel, (that can go in the bin 🙂 ), I reckon I could pass my test anytime
My wife’s previous employer used to make everyone go for a driving assessment with a driving school. Your score on your assessment determined 1. How long before your next assessment; 2. If you needed to complete some tedious online learning stuff - so there was a genuine motivation to do well. The distribution of scores made clear that not everyone could switch on driving properly when they want to. Her boss was essentially resiting his assessment every six months (my wife was the max three years) and had to redo the online learning every time. Obviously it wasn’t actually making him a “better” driver But my point is - some people do seem to struggle to drive “properly” even when being observed. We all learn bad habits and perhaps if it was only for 30 minutes every few years focussing on driving well might help remind us what we should be doing for the next 36 months…
that said I’m not actually that keen on retesting everyone all the time. I’d rather we put that effort into detecting the minor faults and finding ways to address drivers who don’t want to correct them.
Anyone else have the same experience and hold out hope for the future?
Seeing as I just followed a driving instructor about 500 yards and in that time he turned right out of a T-junction without indicating and took an exit off the following roundabout without indicating, then no 😊