British Driving Tests: Unrealistic!
Discussion
Sorry about the thread hijack but:
Use of handbrake.
Leaving your foot on the footbrake and blinding the guy behind is a real no no. Its hardly the end of the world as a safety issue - but it really is unpleasant for following drivers.
I will never understand why manufacturers of autobox vehicles disengage drive when stationary and the footbrake is depressed - but don't do the same for the damn handbrake. Madness. Especially as many now have the (excellent) feature that automatically disengages the handbrake when the accelerator is pressed.
Now. When it comes to junctions and so on whether the handbrake should be used really does come down to common sense IMO. Will you be there more than two or three seconds? In which case handbrake on, neutral. When ready, take up first and be waiting handbrake in hand, foot on accelerator ready for a fast getaway...if you'll be there for ages pop the car in neutral and give your clutch foot a rest.
Not hard.
Anyone doing an IAM test will be encouraged to use the handbrake sensibly not pedantically - that's for learners.
Use of handbrake.
Leaving your foot on the footbrake and blinding the guy behind is a real no no. Its hardly the end of the world as a safety issue - but it really is unpleasant for following drivers.
I will never understand why manufacturers of autobox vehicles disengage drive when stationary and the footbrake is depressed - but don't do the same for the damn handbrake. Madness. Especially as many now have the (excellent) feature that automatically disengages the handbrake when the accelerator is pressed.
Now. When it comes to junctions and so on whether the handbrake should be used really does come down to common sense IMO. Will you be there more than two or three seconds? In which case handbrake on, neutral. When ready, take up first and be waiting handbrake in hand, foot on accelerator ready for a fast getaway...if you'll be there for ages pop the car in neutral and give your clutch foot a rest.
Not hard.
Anyone doing an IAM test will be encouraged to use the handbrake sensibly not pedantically - that's for learners.
Vipers said:
So Julian doesnt use his handbrake or rear fog lights, I could comment on this but dont think it will do any good.
Maybe I met him last week returning from London on the Motorway, absolutely chucking it down, and the number of motorist with absolutely no lights on at all just amazed me, I am a great believer in SEE, AND BE SEEN.
But how does Julian stop his car rolling when he parks on an incline, leave it in gear I wonder?
Nope, not me, I'd be using normal lights in heavy rain or dark conditions. Don't think I've ever seen the need to use fogs in rain though if that was what you were implying.
And yep, parked on a hill I'd use first gear. I would never use a handbrake to keep a car parked on a hill, thats just asking for trouble. And of course wheels to the Kerb.
Seems I'm in the minority here, not sure why, I'm certainly in the majority on the road.
Jolley, I am not suggesting lower standards, but a different system of assesment. You could have a flawless drive and then leave an indicator on for 10 seconds more than you should have (something that happens to everyone) and fail for that.
The test if too rigid. I am NOT advocating lower standards, so please don't suggest that. What I am saying is that anything that is rigid, is by nature inefficient.
The test if too rigid. I am NOT advocating lower standards, so please don't suggest that. What I am saying is that anything that is rigid, is by nature inefficient.
To some extent part of the problem is the test/exam scenario vs continuous assessment.
You can have someone where you and they know can do it, but on the day suffer nerves, a bit of misfortune, another driver being deliberately difficult and you get a fail or a lower grade.
Don't now the answer to be honest. Continuous assessment is impractical from DSA viewpoint, so the test is what we have.
You can have someone where you and they know can do it, but on the day suffer nerves, a bit of misfortune, another driver being deliberately difficult and you get a fail or a lower grade.
Don't now the answer to be honest. Continuous assessment is impractical from DSA viewpoint, so the test is what we have.
AdvocatusDiaboli said:
I started driving when I was 12. I got my first licence (abroad, not in the UK) when I was 18. Passed my test on the spot for cars and bikes. I have driven and ridden sports and luxury cars and bikes regularily since then, and touchwood I have never had a knock or an accident.
Havig been in the UK, and not falling in the category of countries that can exchange their licences, I took my advanced bike licence test last year (DAS) and passed it first time.
If anything, I am a better driver than rider, so imagine my annoyance when i took a driving test last week and was failed!
My examiner was a real piece of work, not so much as a handshake or introduction to start with.
I have to now struggle to find the time to do another test, and plan months in advance for the booking.
I did two lessons, my instructor deemed me good to go and was shocked by the result!
Surely, ten years of driving, and the fact we did not have so much as a lively moment during my exams should count for something! There need to be some changes for mature drivers and those from other countries.
An old post now I know, but many years ago I attended an HGV driving course with the Royal Marines, I was in the Navy at the time. I went straight from a motorbike to a 3 ton truck, my pal who already had a car license was with me. I passed first time, HE FAILED, the examiner said he was over confident and taking risks. Not implying that is the case with you, just an observation.
Personally I have been driving for over 38 years, and if I took a test now and failed, I would be a bit miffed as well. How many others I wonder with years of experience would also fail today. I havnt read all the posts, but good luck next time.
Well Advocatusdiaboli, (by the way: is your name a "test"} 
I passed my motorcycle test in the early 1960's and was a "biker" for some years (MMmmh! I well remember that nice Velocette that I:.........let go for next to nothing!)
Anyway, I took my car test twice. I had lots of experience before my "test", like driving all over Britain,
through the centre of London, (I live in the NW BTW) towing etc. I could put a car anywhere.
On the first occasion, I used my own car, drove perfectly, and!.........................failed!
On the second occasion I used a "School of Motoring" car, drove "very badly", making many mistakes (like hand signals with right hand while changing gear with left hand).....................and passed! (My hill-start was very impressive though if I say so myself!)
Say's it all doesn't it? it's corrupt and they have a "quota"...
Go for it again ASAP .........It's a lottery. Good luck mate.
Having said all that.......
The amount of time for an "examiner" to assess a driver is very small, and NO driver is free of mistakes. But "confidence" behind the wheel is essential.
Perhaps the "instructor" and the "examiner" should: ..............merge?
I passed my motorcycle test in the early 1960's and was a "biker" for some years (MMmmh! I well remember that nice Velocette that I:.........let go for next to nothing!)
Anyway, I took my car test twice. I had lots of experience before my "test", like driving all over Britain,
through the centre of London, (I live in the NW BTW) towing etc. I could put a car anywhere. On the first occasion, I used my own car, drove perfectly, and!.........................failed!
On the second occasion I used a "School of Motoring" car, drove "very badly", making many mistakes (like hand signals with right hand while changing gear with left hand)
.....................and passed! (My hill-start was very impressive though if I say so myself!) Say's it all doesn't it? it's corrupt and they have a "quota"...
Go for it again ASAP .........It's a lottery. Good luck mate.
Having said all that.......
The amount of time for an "examiner" to assess a driver is very small, and NO driver is free of mistakes. But "confidence" behind the wheel is essential.
Perhaps the "instructor" and the "examiner" should: ..............merge?
MOTCO said:
about fog rear lights. They're diabolically useless devices that simply hide the brake lights and dazzle following drivers.
A rear fog light is much more noticeable than tail lights, but one fog light certainly won’t distract you from both brake lights. When in a pea souper with spray, it will greatly aid the following driver to judge that they are leaving a decent gap; hence they will be in a safe position if panic breaking ensues.
I wish more drivers would use them when it’s foggy (and less when it isn’t).
8Pack said:
Perhaps the "instructor" and the "examiner" should: ..............merge?
A very interesting point.
I initially thought this was a good idea, until I realised there would be a conflict of interest. If the idea was implemented, driving schools would likely be tempted to positively influence their chance of being chosen by a learner driver by ‘somehow’ giving higher levels of pass rate, unless they are limited by quotas, in which case they would not be encouraged to get the best from the learners.
External examiners should at least be impartial, but at best they only see a snapshot of your skills. The UK driving test is like any other examination in life and it will continue to be until learners are willing to pay extra for the pleasure of having extra long driving tests.
Can anyone think of a better solution?
advocatusdiaboli said:
My examiner almost grasped the wheel and shoved me away from that lane by saying that was the end of the M25 sliplane and cars "could have/might be bombing down here".
Commiserations advocatusdiaboli.
It is interesting to note your examiner's comment regarding drivers 'bombing' down the slip road. Perhaps this would never have been a problem if UK driving lessons/tests included motorway tuition, hence the UK driving test would be much more realistic anyway.
But what do we know?
advocatusdiaboli said:
Jolley, I am not suggesting lower standards, but a different system of assesment. You could have a flawless drive and then leave an indicator on for 10 seconds more than you should have (something that happens to everyone) and fail for that.
The test if too rigid. I am NOT advocating lower standards, so please don't suggest that. What I am saying is that anything that is rigid, is by nature inefficient.
For some reason I have just remembered that film "the Driver" When Ryan O Niel was being interviewed as the gataway driver he systematically smashed the car to pieces and scared the shit out of the Mafia boss. I would just love to get an old banger and book a driving test. Just to see the look on the guys face.
I actually think driving tests are pointless by the way. I have only met a very few people capable of making any kind of rational judgement about driving skill. Most people want to just assess against a list and driving is far more complex than that. In addition as people swop driving licenses anyway then there seems little point in having a licensing system.
advocatusdiaboli said:
I believe I was failed for the following (bit unclear on it because it made very little sense). My instructor told me that this was something I could have been failed on, or it could have been let slide. As someone mentioned, depends on the person I guess.
While on an A-road I was asked to pull into a B-road that came up further along. I could see the B-road ahead of me, so I put my signal on and shifted left. There were absolutely no cars behind me, I was the only car heading in my direction. Not a car in sight, totally safe to move.
My examiner almost grasped the wheel and shoved me away from that lane by saying that was the end of the M25 sliplane and cars "could have/might be bombing down here".
If he almost grabbed the wheel he must have considered it a serious fault not a minor one - you can have up to 15 of those but one serious one is an automatic fail.
>> Edited by annsxman on Friday 5th August 10:53
annsxman said:
If he almost grabbed the wheel he must have considered it a serious fault not a minor one - you can have up to 15 of those but one serious one is an automatic fail.
Reading it, not necessarily.
If I've got it right, AD was travelling along a main road (d-carriageway?), moved across to position himself correctly for an upcoming left turn, but at the time was approaching an off-slip for the M-25. Unless there was a car coming or AD was about to hit the verge, where's the big problem? No, it's probably not advanced positioning skills, but I see far worse than that on a daily basis.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff