Accidents now rising. What's going on?
Discussion
vonhosen said:
No, because there is value in simulators prior to 'live' assessment. It's done in aviation & other areas of vehicle training.
On £300 quids worth of PC, sat at a desk, on an Argos office chair?The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
Digby said:
vonhosen said:
No, because there is value in simulators prior to 'live' assessment. It's done in aviation & other areas of vehicle training.
On £300 quids worth of PC, sat at a desk, on an Argos office chair?The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
You couldn't do it, I understand that's frustrating for you.
Digby said:
On £300 quids worth of PC, sat at a desk, on an Argos office chair?
The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
I did RAF psychometric aircrew test at Cranwell. It was done on antique computers, on plastic seats that would have been too poor for a failing pub's garden in February. The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
Digby said:
How would any of them have known? I had no idea they were spending millions on cameras a mile from my home until the framework went up.I had no idea a national speed limit road (a road I used for 12 years) was dropped to 40 mph untill I drove over the freshly painted characters on the tarmac and saw the new sign.Most of us had no idea there was to be a new rail link until some houses were demolished.
You either need to take more interest in what is going on around you, or resign yourself to happening anyway.Did anyone actually look up the stats?
turns out it has nothing to do with anything discussed on this thread.
The reason was simple, we have seen a rolling year total that has been higher in the last 3 quarters, the reason being an unusually low Q1 2013 dropped out of the statistics meaning Q1 2014 for one of the first times ever showed a rise, so for the last 3 quarters we've had a higher rolling year total, but the last 2 quarters have shown the usual slight fall in rates, so unless we have had a very bad Q4, the year end stats will probably show a very similar number to 2014, despite a rise in traffic.
turns out it has nothing to do with anything discussed on this thread.
The reason was simple, we have seen a rolling year total that has been higher in the last 3 quarters, the reason being an unusually low Q1 2013 dropped out of the statistics meaning Q1 2014 for one of the first times ever showed a rise, so for the last 3 quarters we've had a higher rolling year total, but the last 2 quarters have shown the usual slight fall in rates, so unless we have had a very bad Q4, the year end stats will probably show a very similar number to 2014, despite a rise in traffic.
Derek Smith said:
<snip>
As for drivers deciding what speed would be compatible in the circumstances, drivers should be doing this every day of course. It is a fundamental requirement. Not to do so can be an offence. A 50 limit road is only a maximum permissible. The driver must assess visibility, traction, traffic density and so much more. Whilst drivers will come to different conclusions, with so many variables what would you expect? There is never going to be a 'right' speed for all, but there will be a 'right' speed for each individual.
(my bold)As for drivers deciding what speed would be compatible in the circumstances, drivers should be doing this every day of course. It is a fundamental requirement. Not to do so can be an offence. A 50 limit road is only a maximum permissible. The driver must assess visibility, traction, traffic density and so much more. Whilst drivers will come to different conclusions, with so many variables what would you expect? There is never going to be a 'right' speed for all, but there will be a 'right' speed for each individual.
And based on my own experience in the recent icy weather, this is exactly what (many*) drivers are not doing.
Like being followed by a car length at 25mph on a narrow road with 6" wide frozen streams on either side for example.
Or night driving on an unlit road with someone following so close that I couldn't even see their headlights.
The two second rule? Nah!!! That's for wimps!!
However, it must be said that during my winter commute I have yet to witness an accident.
- the vast majority on my regular route to work
Derek Smith said:
Digby said:
On £300 quids worth of PC, sat at a desk, on an Argos office chair?
The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
I did RAF psychometric aircrew test at Cranwell. It was done on antique computers, on plastic seats that would have been too poor for a failing pub's garden in February. The last time I voiced my opinion on these tests, I seem to remember certain members trying their best to defend them.Now it seems I was correct to be concerned if you say they have made changes.It is ok to be wrong you know.
As Von said, changes appear to have been made now but I feel sorry for all those who failed previously and had to pay again and those who will undoubtedly click their mice too early or too late, fail and have to pay again this time round, too.
singlecoil said:
You either need to take more interest in what is going on around you, or resign yourself to happening anyway.
Sounds good.Dedicate my life to seraching for things which haven't yet happened, then, when they do start to happen, have my opinions ignored and then my opinions about my opinions being ignored, ignored.Digby said:
vonhosen said:
You're right it is OK.
You couldn't do it, I understand that's frustrating for you.
Nice try.I understand your frustration at defending something which was flawed.Some of us did try to explain these flaws.You couldn't do it, I understand that's frustrating for you.
As it is I looked at what was required, did it & passed it
I know numerous instructors and examiners who took it when first introduced and almost all failed.They have changed it because it was flawed and it still is.You couldn't even see some of the hazards in time and some were impossible to see as it was dark etc.
I passed first time btw (not that any of us needed to be there in the first place), but unlike yourself, I also spotted the flaws and didn't try to defend them.Disagree all you like, it's your word against those who designed and recently changed the system, not just mine.
I was so good, I almost opened up the bonus levels and got an extra life!
I passed first time btw (not that any of us needed to be there in the first place), but unlike yourself, I also spotted the flaws and didn't try to defend them.Disagree all you like, it's your word against those who designed and recently changed the system, not just mine.
I was so good, I almost opened up the bonus levels and got an extra life!
Digby said:
I know numerous instructors and examiners who took it when first introduced and almost all failed.They have changed it because it was flawed and it still is.You couldn't even see some of the hazards in time and some were impossible to see as it was dark etc.
I passed first time btw (not that any of us needed to be there in the first place), but unlike yourself, I also spotted the flaws and didn't try to defend them.Disagree all you like, it's your word against those who designed and recently changed the system, not just mine.
I was so good, I almost opened up the bonus levels and got an extra life!
I know plenty too & the vast majority passed. I passed first time btw (not that any of us needed to be there in the first place), but unlike yourself, I also spotted the flaws and didn't try to defend them.Disagree all you like, it's your word against those who designed and recently changed the system, not just mine.
I was so good, I almost opened up the bonus levels and got an extra life!
Nothing's perfect there are always flaws, but that's not the point, the point is that it improves & moves forward, these things are constantly evolving, which is what I'd been saying from the start. Training has been changing over the past 50 years & continues to do so.
It's never been difficult to pass the hazard perception though, if you look at what you were being asked to do & did that.
It will never be as good as being asked to describe what is around you from the driving seat (especially for those who don't use PC's).As mentioned earlier about the pass plus modules (feedback on that?), why do they not just include this whilst on your test and in a car? What could be easier and cheaper? Do the police still have to give a commentary of what they see when being trained in certain vehicles?
Maybe you could explain exactly what it is people will be learn from the hazard test? An entire industry from books to DVD's have sprung up to help you pass it.Youtube and various forums are littered with videos and info of people trying to tell you when to click the mouse (apparently it can vary from test centre to test centre!)Then there are ways to count and then press, ways to tap your leg x amount of times and press, ways to say "elephant" several times in your head and press etc.What will drivers take away from the experience of practicing how to click a mouse? Why would you favour this over driving a car? How could anyone?
Maybe you could explain exactly what it is people will be learn from the hazard test? An entire industry from books to DVD's have sprung up to help you pass it.Youtube and various forums are littered with videos and info of people trying to tell you when to click the mouse (apparently it can vary from test centre to test centre!)Then there are ways to count and then press, ways to tap your leg x amount of times and press, ways to say "elephant" several times in your head and press etc.What will drivers take away from the experience of practicing how to click a mouse? Why would you favour this over driving a car? How could anyone?
Edited by Digby on Friday 6th February 23:48
Digby said:
It will never be as good as being asked to describe what is around you from the driving seat (especially for those who don't use PC's).As mentioned earlier about the pass plus modules (feedback on that?), why do they not just include this whilst on your test and in a car? What could be easier and cheaper? Do the police still have to give a commentary of what they see when being trained in certain vehicles?
Maybe you could explain exactly what it is people will be learn from the hazard test? An entire industry from books to DVD's have sprung up to help you pass it.Youtube and various forums are littered with videos and info of people trying to tell you when to click the mouse (apparently it can vary from test centre to test centre!)Then there are ways to count and then press, ways to tap your leg x amount of times and press, ways to say "elephant" several times in your head and press etc.What will drivers take away from the experience of practicing how to click a mouse? Why would you favour this over driving a car? How could anyone?
It's not instead of, it's a precursor to.Maybe you could explain exactly what it is people will be learn from the hazard test? An entire industry from books to DVD's have sprung up to help you pass it.Youtube and various forums are littered with videos and info of people trying to tell you when to click the mouse (apparently it can vary from test centre to test centre!)Then there are ways to count and then press, ways to tap your leg x amount of times and press, ways to say "elephant" several times in your head and press etc.What will drivers take away from the experience of practicing how to click a mouse? Why would you favour this over driving a car? How could anyone?
You don't get a licence to drive, ADI etc from it. It's a stage towards, just like it's used in Police pursuit training or aviation training. Lower risk in the early stages.
Pass plus, well for a start you can't go on motorways as a bike/car learner.
Many who have to take a hazard test have held a licence for years.
And how daft is it that you don't go on a motorway with an instructor to obtain your licence, but once you have, you can, if you don't fancy taking your first tentative steps alone, pay extra to go on a motorway with an instructor?
And how daft is it that you don't go on a motorway with an instructor to obtain your licence, but once you have, you can, if you don't fancy taking your first tentative steps alone, pay extra to go on a motorway with an instructor?
Digby said:
Many who have to take a hazard test have held a licence for years.
And only those who either want to drive a new class of vehicle (i.e. vocational licence) or train/test others have to do it after they've held a licence.No bad thing that those who want to drive a bus for of people, LGVs or train/test others should have a check.
Digby said:
And how daft is it that you don't go on a motorway with an instructor to obtain your licence, but once you have, you can, if you don't fancy taking your first tentative steps alone, pay extra to go on a motorway with an instructor?
It can't be made part of the test because they aren't near enough to every test centre.It's therefore prudent to have a lesson on one following test if you are likely to use them. Of course if you don't live near one & are never likely to use one you may not bother.
vonhosen said:
No bad thing that those who want to drive a bus for of people, LGVs or train/test others should have a check.
I don't agree where the hazard part is concerned.I feel sorry for those drivers who may want a car, bike, 7.5 ton > HGV and PCV entitlement on their licence.They will have to sit through the same mouse clicking hazard video FIVE times.Unless things have changed, it's the exact same video.How can it not be enough to pass it one time and that be it? There is no guarantee that just because you passed it once you will pass again, either.
It just seems as pointless to me and as out of control as all the health and safety courses, paperwork and tests and their videos we are forced to watch.I must now have two or three dozen H&S courses under my belt, but none of them actually count for anything.If I walk into a new job tomorrow, I will have to go through the same stuff all over again and again and again...
Most of this stuff is here simply to make money and justify jobs for specific departments.Think how much could be saved if certain courses gave you a certificate you could produce.
Going back to the hazard test, how can it be you can fail even though you spot all the hazards / developing hazards.It's there to test your ability to see and declare what you consider a hazard, so how can you still fail by seeing all of them? That's not a test which examines your ability to see issues on the road, it's a test to see if you have learned when to click a mouse.On several forums I read that you are best not to treat it like real life, because it isn't.See something in the distance with an indicator on watiing to pull out? Don't click yet! Not yet...not yet...not yet....not yet.....it's about to carve you up, so CLICK NOW!!! Utterly pointless.
Edited by Digby on Saturday 7th February 11:08
Digby said:
vonhosen said:
No bad thing that those who want to drive a bus for of people, LGVs or train/test others should have a check.
I don't agree where the hazard part is concerned.I feel sorry for those drivers who may want a car, bike, 7.5 ton > HGV and PCV entitlement on their licence.They will have to sit through the same mouse clicking hazard video FIVE times.Unless things have changed, it's the exact same video.How can it not be enough to pass it one time and that be it? There is no guarantee that just because you passed it once you will pass again, either.
There's no guarantee that you passed your practical test last time that you will next. That's not a good reason to not have another test for a new vehicle class.
Digby said:
Stuff about H&S.........
Most of this stuff is here simply to make money and justify jobs for specific departments.Think how much could be saved if certain courses gave you a certificate you could produce.
Most of it is there because people keep cocking up & employers have liabilities that they wish to mitigate so that they don't end up going to prison for an employee not doing what they should have been doing.Most of this stuff is here simply to make money and justify jobs for specific departments.Think how much could be saved if certain courses gave you a certificate you could produce.
That & employees who make the cock up will sue saying 'I was never trained to do.......'
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 7th February 11:10
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff