Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

"I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them.

How would you know what their attitude is? Do you stop and have a chat with them?

No I don't but if someone's flashing their headlights - sometimes accompanied with an abusive hand gesture - I don't think you need to be Einstein to work out they're not happy! Given I've never come close to cutting anyone up whilst overtaking to me the only sensible interpretation you can put on it is they don't like being overtaken and one assumes that's because they think they're driving at a speed which everyone else should be content to follow; do you have an alternative explanation for their reaction?

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

"I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them.

How would you know what their attitude is? Do you stop and have a chat with them?

No I don't but if someone's flashing their headlights - sometimes accompanied with an abusive hand gesture - I don't think you need to be Einstein to work out they're not happy! Given I've never come close to cutting anyone up whilst overtaking to me the only sensible interpretation you can put on it is they don't like being overtaken and one assumes that's because they think they're driving at a speed which everyone else should be content to follow; do you have an alternative explanation for their reaction?

You didn't say about the hand gestures before, but in any case, as I wasn't there on any of these occasions, I can't provide an alternative reason.

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

"I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them.

How would you know what their attitude is? Do you stop and have a chat with them?

No I don't but if someone's flashing their headlights - sometimes accompanied with an abusive hand gesture - I don't think you need to be Einstein to work out they're not happy! Given I've never come close to cutting anyone up whilst overtaking to me the only sensible interpretation you can put on it is they don't like being overtaken and one assumes that's because they think they're driving at a speed which everyone else should be content to follow; do you have an alternative explanation for their reaction?

You didn't say about the hand gestures before, but in any case, as I wasn't there on any of these occasions, I can't provide an alternative reason.

Hand gestures are rare but even when they're not present I don't for one second think a person who's flashing their lights in an (often) agitated way is doing it to let me know it's safe to pull back in; pretty clear to me what their mindset is and I don't think an alternative explanation for their reaction would hold much water. The idea of stopping them to have a chat is an interesting one but I suspect that's how some road rage incidents start so on reflection probably best not to go there!

[JNW1]

drf765 said:

JNW1 said:

drf765 said:

In any case, drivers are entitled to drive at whatever speed they wish within the limits of the regulations. If they need to do that to feel comfortable or safe or both they can. Just wait patiently to pass or be let past.

Edited by drf765 on Thursday 8th December 14:43

Is that right though? The comment has been made by another poster that if you take your driving test and drive at 40mph on a clear stretch of 60mph road you can expect to fail and when I was learning one of things my instructor always said to me was I risked failing if I didn't make what he described as "proper progress"; therefore, if driving too slowly is unacceptable in the driving test why is it acceptable once you've passed? I'm not advocating speeding here but it's surely not an unreasonable expectation that people drive somewhere near the speed limit assuming conditions allow?

As for being let past by these individuals dream on; in my experience you just have to wait for a suitable opportunity to overtake and often when you do you see flashing headlights when you look back in the mirror - "I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them....

Would you fail your test though?

If you are on your test and you are justified in driving safely and within the limits and you are making reasonable progress you will be fine. If you repeatedly fail to make sufficient progress and never do so then the examiner would have concerns and may fail the candidate.

How do you know that the person driving within the limit but not up to that limit and is slower than you would like to go is incompetent? Anyone at any time can drive just as fast or as slow as they wish...as long as it is reasonable, safe and appropriate. 10mph to 30mph on the motorway in free flowing traffic isn't approriate I would say.

30-50 in an NSL single carriageway NSL is perfectly OK, why not? I'm certain that wouldn't be a fail on the test.

You don't have to drive at the limit just because the driver behind wants to or indeed your examiner.

If people are passing their driving test doing 30mph in a 60mph limit without any mitigating reason - such as traffic or bad weather - I would be very disappointed; however, looking at a lot of the driving on the roads nowadays you might be right!

Having said that, a quick look on Google produced the link below which includes advice to pupils on how to pass the driving test; the first item the examiner is apparently expecting you to do is "Drive up to the speed limit if road, weather and traffic conditions permit or at a realistic speed if not". I accept it's only one company's view but it's in accord with what I was told prior to taking my test (albeit that was many moons ago now!).

http://www.theorytestadvice.co.uk/driving-test/mar...

[JNW1]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

Is that right though? The comment has been made by another poster that if you take your driving test and drive at 40mph on a clear stretch of 60mph road you can expect to fail and when I was learning one of things my instructor always said to me was I risked failing if I didn't make what he described as "proper progress"; therefore, if driving too slowly is unacceptable in the driving test why is it acceptable once you've passed?

Because, as said above, the test is to show you can do certain things. You are under no obligation to keep doing them.

Do you think that if someone hates reverse parking, they are under some kind of duty to do it. They need to be able to do it on the test if asked, but they can choose to go the next 50 years without doing it again. It's their choice. If they are happy doing 40 in a 60, then let them get on with it.

You've used the reverse parking analogy twice now and it was nonsense the first time! Yes that's a skill you need to have for the driving test and can choose not to use ever again if you don't want to; however, providing you don't scrape other people's cars when parking how you get into a space is up to you and doesn't affect other road users. In contrast, not making proper progress when conditions allow does affect other road users and all I'm saying is that if that standard of driving isn't acceptable in the driving test it shouldn't be acceptable afterwards either.

Mind you, we do seem to have a difference of opinion as to whether or not consistently failing to make proper progress (i.e. getting somewhere near the speed limit) would constitute a fail on a driving test; any driving examiners or instructors on here who can offer an informed view?

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

Mind you, we do seem to have a difference of opinion as to whether or not consistently failing to make proper progress (i.e. getting somewhere near the speed limit) would constitute a fail on a driving test; any driving examiners or instructors on here who can offer an informed view?

I expect it's a rule which allows examiners to fail learners who are driving very slowly in order to give themselves more time to think about what they are doing and then to do it. In other words, the way in which any person who wasn't able to do something would attempt to do it if forced to. I would be the same if I had to drive heavy excavating machinery.

[vonhosen]

JNW1 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

Is that right though? The comment has been made by another poster that if you take your driving test and drive at 40mph on a clear stretch of 60mph road you can expect to fail and when I was learning one of things my instructor always said to me was I risked failing if I didn't make what he described as "proper progress"; therefore, if driving too slowly is unacceptable in the driving test why is it acceptable once you've passed?

Because, as said above, the test is to show you can do certain things. You are under no obligation to keep doing them.

Do you think that if someone hates reverse parking, they are under some kind of duty to do it. They need to be able to do it on the test if asked, but they can choose to go the next 50 years without doing it again. It's their choice. If they are happy doing 40 in a 60, then let them get on with it.

You've used the reverse parking analogy twice now and it was nonsense the first time! Yes that's a skill you need to have for the driving test and can choose not to use ever again if you don't want to; however, providing you don't scrape other people's cars when parking how you get into a space is up to you and doesn't affect other road users. In contrast, not making proper progress when conditions allow does affect other road users and all I'm saying is that if that standard of driving isn't acceptable in the driving test it shouldn't be acceptable afterwards either.

Mind you, we do seem to have a difference of opinion as to whether or not consistently failing to make proper progress (i.e. getting somewhere near the speed limit) would constitute a fail on a driving test; any driving examiners or instructors on here who can offer an informed view?

Yes

Simply driving below the NSL limit will not of it's own result in a serious fault & therefore failure., there'd need to be some aggravating circumstances.

It's far easier to fail exceeding the limit than driving under it.

[JNW1]

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

Is that right though? The comment has been made by another poster that if you take your driving test and drive at 40mph on a clear stretch of 60mph road you can expect to fail and when I was learning one of things my instructor always said to me was I risked failing if I didn't make what he described as "proper progress"; therefore, if driving too slowly is unacceptable in the driving test why is it acceptable once you've passed?

Because, as said above, the test is to show you can do certain things. You are under no obligation to keep doing them.

Do you think that if someone hates reverse parking, they are under some kind of duty to do it. They need to be able to do it on the test if asked, but they can choose to go the next 50 years without doing it again. It's their choice. If they are happy doing 40 in a 60, then let them get on with it.

You've used the reverse parking analogy twice now and it was nonsense the first time! Yes that's a skill you need to have for the driving test and can choose not to use ever again if you don't want to; however, providing you don't scrape other people's cars when parking how you get into a space is up to you and doesn't affect other road users. In contrast, not making proper progress when conditions allow does affect other road users and all I'm saying is that if that standard of driving isn't acceptable in the driving test it shouldn't be acceptable afterwards either.

Mind you, we do seem to have a difference of opinion as to whether or not consistently failing to make proper progress (i.e. getting somewhere near the speed limit) would constitute a fail on a driving test; any driving examiners or instructors on here who can offer an informed view?

Yes

Simply driving below the NSL limit will not of it's own result in a serious fault & therefore failure., there'd need to be some aggravating circumstances.

It's far easier to fail exceeding the limit than driving under it.

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

[Pothole]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

"I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them.

How would you know what their attitude is? Do you stop and have a chat with them?

He doesn't. Nor can I see him saying that he does. Hence "seems".

[Davidonly]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

Red Devil said:

As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.

Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.

Probably because it's true! Our roads are full of people crawling along causing queues (and frustration) whilst believing they're driving safely. When I was learning to drive if I'd been doing 40mph on a clear road with a 60mph limit my driving instructor would have suggested ever so politely that I get my finger out and speed-up a bit as I wasn't making proper progress for the conditions; he never suggested I should break the speed limit, only that I should be courteous to other road users....

It's NOT true. It may well suit you to believe it's true, but it isn't.

I have been in a car with a new driver and suggested they were travelling 'too fast' to hear them state clearly ' I am not exceeding the speed limit'.

My son's driving instructor has actually said (which I agree with) that unless there is a good reason not to he should proceed at the speed limit posted to avoid causing frustration behind.

Not sure what's not true here???

[JNW1]

Pothole said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

"I'm crawling along and how dare you want to go faster" seems to be the attitude with many of them.

How would you know what their attitude is? Do you stop and have a chat with them?

He doesn't. Nor can I see him saying that he does. Hence "seems".

Keep-up at the back, this was covered several posts ago......

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

I imagine it depends a bit on where you take your test but even when I did mine over 30 years ago there was some out of town work on NSL roads (albeit probably no more than about 10% of the total time). However, regardless of the exact limit, the question is does the driver recognise the limit changes - and adjust their speed accordingly - or do they just drive slowly regardless? If I was an examiner I'd want to see evidence of the former as to me anyone who just drives slowly all the time would convey an impression of someone who isn't really aware and/or confident enough to be allowed out on the road on their own.

[Davidonly]

vonhosen said:

Someone doing 40 is easier to pass legally than someone doing 50.

Not once they are part of the massive rolling road-block that always forms behind a slow car. The car at the front is not to be blamed. The next one, driving too close with no intention to pass is... then a few more after that until no-one can overtake safely even if they want to. But someone will try.

The A9 is no safer since SPECS was installed as the convoy mentality has grown since they were deployed. So to summarise - assuming the limit is sensible (increasingly rare) then the more drivers that drive at a sensible (85%) limit - the better.

[vonhosen]

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

I imagine it depends a bit on where you take your test but even when I did mine over 30 years ago there was some out of town work on NSL roads (albeit probably no more than about 10% of the total time). However, regardless of the exact limit, the question is does the driver recognise the limit changes - and adjust their speed accordingly - or do they just drive slowly regardless? If I was an examiner I'd want to see evidence of the former as to me anyone who just drives slowly all the time would convey an impression of someone who isn't really aware and/or confident enough to be allowed out on the road on their own.

If you were an examiner you'd be using & applying the DVSA examiner's tools of assessment & not doing your own thing.

[JNW1]

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

I imagine it depends a bit on where you take your test but even when I did mine over 30 years ago there was some out of town work on NSL roads (albeit probably no more than about 10% of the total time). However, regardless of the exact limit, the question is does the driver recognise the limit changes - and adjust their speed accordingly - or do they just drive slowly regardless? If I was an examiner I'd want to see evidence of the former as to me anyone who just drives slowly all the time would convey an impression of someone who isn't really aware and/or confident enough to be allowed out on the road on their own.

If you were an examiner you'd be using & applying the DVSA examiner's tools of assessment & not doing your own thing.

And what do these Tools of Assessment say on this matter then; ok to drive at 30mph everywhere?

[vonhosen]

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

I imagine it depends a bit on where you take your test but even when I did mine over 30 years ago there was some out of town work on NSL roads (albeit probably no more than about 10% of the total time). However, regardless of the exact limit, the question is does the driver recognise the limit changes - and adjust their speed accordingly - or do they just drive slowly regardless? If I was an examiner I'd want to see evidence of the former as to me anyone who just drives slowly all the time would convey an impression of someone who isn't really aware and/or confident enough to be allowed out on the road on their own.

If you were an examiner you'd be using & applying the DVSA examiner's tools of assessment & not doing your own thing.

And what do these Tools of Assessment say on this matter then; ok to drive at 30mph everywhere?

You apply the tools looking at all the circumstances & that will result (as I said) in you not getting a serious fault for simply driving below the limit.

[Devil2575]

Davidonly said:

I have been in a car with a new driver and suggested they were travelling 'too fast' to hear them state clearly ' I am not exceeding the speed limit'.

So what? So you disagree with the driver over what is a safe speed to travel at. Drivers have been saying this to passengers for as long as I'be been driving.

Davidonly said:

My son's driving instructor has actually said (which I agree with) that unless there is a good reason not to he should proceed at the speed limit posted to avoid causing frustration behind.

Not sure what's not true here???

Yes but would that equate to a fail? My wife was told something similar but failure to make adequate progress only results in a minor so not by itself a failure. The important thing was to clearly alter speed at limit changes to show you had observed it.

[JNW1]

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

vonhosen said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

So if during the course of their driving test a pupil had two or three stints on a 60mph road - and never exceeded (say) 30mph despite having little traffic and decent weather conditions - that would be fine and worthy of a pass as far as an examiner is concerned?

Do driving tests now include such roads? Long time since I took mine but if they now do then that's a good thing.

I imagine it depends a bit on where you take your test but even when I did mine over 30 years ago there was some out of town work on NSL roads (albeit probably no more than about 10% of the total time). However, regardless of the exact limit, the question is does the driver recognise the limit changes - and adjust their speed accordingly - or do they just drive slowly regardless? If I was an examiner I'd want to see evidence of the former as to me anyone who just drives slowly all the time would convey an impression of someone who isn't really aware and/or confident enough to be allowed out on the road on their own.

If you were an examiner you'd be using & applying the DVSA examiner's tools of assessment & not doing your own thing.

And what do these Tools of Assessment say on this matter then; ok to drive at 30mph everywhere?

You apply the tools looking at all the circumstances & that will result (as I said) in you not getting a serious fault for simply driving below the limit.

So a person makes no major mistakes on their test (doesn't run into anything or anyone, doesn't mount any kerbs during manoeuvres, etc) but never recognises a change in the speed limit and never exceeds 30mph even when it's safe to do so and the speed limit permits. Despite a little queue forming behind them when they do this in a 50mph or 60mph limit the Tools say that's a pass?

[Devil2575]

JNW1 said:

So a person makes no major mistakes on their test (doesn't run into anything or anyone, doesn't mount any kerbs during manoeuvres, etc) but never recognises a change in the speed limit and never exceeds 30mph even when it's safe to do so and the speed limit permits. Despite a little queue forming behind them when they do this in a 50mph or 60mph limit the Tools say that's a pass?

Did anyone say that? You can clearly change speed while still driving at well below the limit.