advanced driving licence

[mlc]

Peter,

I was commenting on the sanity of allowing a novice drive a high performance car. You are fooling yourself if you think a head on collision at high speed is survivable. I seem to remember a very famous Princess had an accident in an S class in Paris, the sad score on that night was concrete support posts 3 survivers 1 - and that was with life time injurys, and that was a glancing blow. At the time MB felt required to point out that their car had offered more protection than could be expected from the competion. QED.

I think the point you are missing is that whilst the TT or other well built car gives more protection than a Ka or a Saxo that is far outweighed by the potential speed and acceleration of the car. No body ever crashed a mini 850 doing a ton - cos they didnt go that fast!! so the fact that the TT gives more protection at a 100 than the old mini is irrelevant.

Mark.

 

[lordylawks]

IT really doesn't matter what the car is as most will now reach 100 mph. It seems to me that a driving test which only evaluates a driver's abilities at 30 mph completely ignores the reality of both the performance of modern cars and the influence movies, games and TV programmes have on the attitudes of those driving for the first time. In games there is no consequence when having a prang. In movies the hero always walks away from a wreck and always makes it round any corner at any speed. On Top Gear - which I happen to enjoy for it's irreverence - we are positively encouraged to doughnut and thrash the arse off our cars. All the messages reaching testosterone flooded 17 year old males is that it is cool to drive close to the edge and going over the edge has few consequences. If we accept we are not going to change the performance and the media and peer pressure - and we are not - then perhaps recognising all this we should modernise the driving test to better teach the skills that will allow the most vulnerable - 17 - 23 year old males - to control the cars they drive.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

i notice nobody seems to be disagree ing with re-testing or improving driving skills..........


maybes we should tell and mp and get them to make up a new law requiering everyone to have an advanced test before being alowed in a car with more than 90hp?

they banned fox hunting and that had no impact on the dangers of crossing the road...and i know see we are gettying better school dinner so our kids live longer to work longer to pay more for us pensiors when we get there...maybes they should do something about trying to keep them alive once they can drive cars too...just to make sure they still work till they are 75 so they can pay for me to spend 40years living off the state....?


do you know i think the country has lost the plot a bit...

 

[lordylawks]

A note to Clarkson at TG could be fun especially if sanctioned by this august forum ....

 

[davidsl500]

Slink old bean,

Please dont give this government any more excuses for taxing the poor old motorist ! Retesting costs money and lets face it, they are going to charge and what happens if you have a bad day and you fail on some minor technicality ? is there a grace period - or does it mean you cant drive until you retake it again and therefore could lose your job if you need to drive for a living ?

Should you be retested on your o and a levels and degree's ? Should you be re-interviewed for your own job every year or two?

I agree that if you commit a motoring offence (Not speeding unless 10mph above or more) then a retrain/retest should be mandatory.

4x4 owners should be made to take an additional test which should include manouvering and parking - i watched a woman spend 15 minutes trying to park her 4x4 in the supermarket car park - in the end she gave up and drove off despite having TWO bays side by side to park in.

People driving with their front fog lights on in normal or rainy conditions should of course be shot at dawn and their homes burnt to the ground.

 

[lordylawks]

4x4 owners should be made to take an additional test which should include manouvering and parking - i watched a woman spend 15 minutes trying to park her 4x4 in the supermarket car park - in the end she gave up and drove off despite having TWO bays side by side to park in.

People driving with their front fog lights on in normal or rainy conditions should of course be shot at dawn and their homes burnt to the ground.

And those who stay in the middle lane of the motorway when the inside lane is clear should be used as kindling for the fire on which those who stay in the outside lane at 80 are slowly roasted.

 

[tom7035]

Motorways? THREE lanes? You lucky people south of the border!

 

[peterchurch]

Peter,
I was commenting on the sanity of allowing a novice drive a high performance car. You are fooling yourself if you think a head on collision at high speed is survivable. I seem to remember a very famous Princess had an accident in an S class in Paris, the sad score on that night was concrete support posts 3 survivers 1 - and that was with life time injurys, and that was a glancing blow. At the time MB felt required to point out that their car had offered more protection than could be expected from the competion. QED.

1) She was not wearing a seatbelt

2) It did

3) I knew a chap (friend of a friend) that was buried in a matchbox after he had an accident in a clio and the other car ripped him in half and that was at half the speed of the S class you mention...

The problem comes of telling young kids that they "must not" drive fast cars cos its dangerous to do so. This is a red rag to a bull. What I am suggesting is that if you treat speed as nothing to write home about, and fast cars as the norm and they have nothing to prove, or go against...

More powerful cars also have better ABS breaks and a more dynamic suspension set up to help if they need it, instead of s**t drums that fade when they get hot, no ABS and suspension made for tescos...

If you want to get an idea what car offer what protection then check this out...

http://www.wreckedexotics.com/

There was a picture of a crash on here with a lorry rear ending a merc in the middle (and you can just make out about 5 inches of it) was a little compact car (106 or what ever) that kindly acted as a sponge for the impact. I drive the on the M4 about twice a week now (used to do it every day) and I have lost count of the number of "milkshakes" I have seen spread up the tarmac when things go wrong

 

[SLinKyjoe]

Slink old bean,

Please dont give this government any more excuses for taxing the poor old motorist ! Retesting costs money and lets face it, they are going to charge and what happens if you have a bad day and you fail on some minor technicality ? is there a grace period - or does it mean you cant drive until you retake it again and therefore could lose your job if you need to drive for a living ?

Should you be retested on your o and a levels and degree's ? Should you be re-interviewed for your own job every year or two?

I agree that if you commit a motoring offence (Not speeding unless 10mph above or more) then a retrain/retest should be mandatory.

4x4 owners should be made to take an additional test which should include manouvering and parking - i watched a woman spend 15 minutes trying to park her 4x4 in the supermarket car park - in the end she gave up and drove off despite having TWO bays side by side to park in.

People driving with their front fog lights on in normal or rainy conditions should of course be shot at dawn and their homes burnt to the ground.

i think that when you pass the test you are achieving the minimum standard not the maximum.....therefore you should all imporve from that day and have no toruble passing any retests...however that is not what happens today....so driving gets worse unless you are interest in driving, get further training on your own back or by company or such like.....as far as the tax is concerned..he is a thoought...we dont have any money for hospitals yet the found £100m in a box for the tsunami disaster.....hmmmmmm no wonder the roads have holes in....

so i take you point about fog lights an such like but if you are a good driver you will, at all times, have no trouble passsing a test and therefore the argument about failing and losing your job doesnt exsist..unless you are a crap driver,,,,then you shouldn't be driving until you can achive the minimum standard...


so...sorry....thats my view....too dangerous not to have it....

 

[mlc]

Peter,

Im sorry but you dont seem to live on the same planet as me.

Firstly saying that your SL is so much better than the little cars is true, but in the main people drive the little cars that you are putting down - because it's what they can afford. I dont personally have any friends that can afford to offer an SL to their teenagers.

Secondly the idea that you tell the teenager that speed is nothing so he wont put his foot down is mad. Just because you dont tell him doesnt stop the rest of the world letting the cat out of the bag. The truth is (and we all know it) that actually driving fast is good fun. If it wasnt the case we would be driving big cars with little engines, after all the limit is 70 in the UK, you could probablly get that out of an S class with a 1000cc engine and just think of the fuel economy - but would you buy it - of course not.

Thirdly it doesnt seem as if you have actually driven many of these modern super minis, the truth is they are actually rather good. puma for instance - which was really a fiesta - had 5 stars from What Car and was their recommended car for the whole production run, I believe at the time it was their only 5 star rating.

Finally surviving an accident. The motor industry talks about the acceptable level of death. Basically everytime a new safety feature comes along people drive with a little more risk because they know they are a bit safer. The perfect example of this is that Volvo drivers have more than an average number of accidents, because everyone knows how safe they are in a volvo. Everytime you trigger your ABS, traction control etc. it is because you are not driving correctly, these are safety back up systems. Your suggestion that your MB will protect you so well in an accident is turning the whole concept on its head, you should be driving in such a manner that the accident wouldnt occur in the first place. To rely, however slightly, on the idea that its ok because the cars safety systems will protect you is (in my humble opinion) plan stupid.

It could of course be me

Mark

 

[pascal]

This is gone a little off topic guys. Can I get an advanced drivers licence the same as yours. Do I have to go to Britain to do the test.

PS I have direct experience of a head-on colision. And all I can say if this happens to you, there is always the luck factor (angle of impact etc to consider). I spent 7 years in and out of hospital, due to another car going out of control coming towards me. The other driver was fine (hardly a mark on her), in a UNO. Mine was a Pajaro.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

tell you what.

http://www.iam.org.uk/
http://www.rospa.org.uk/


those may help answer all our questions

 

[tom7035]

There is no such thing actually as an 'advanced driving licence'. Any full driving licence simply confirms one has passed a test of minimum competence to drive vehicles of a particular category. The advanced DRIVER comes long after this test of minimum competence.

Just a point.

 

[pascal]

Thanks Joe & Tom. We have those over here. I thought that maybe you got an add-on to your actual DVLA licence.

The advanced DRIVER comes long after this test of minimum competence.

Just a point.

Beleive me I am 'long after' since I passed my test in Hounslow, and I am (I Hope) (no, I am) a far better driver than then, especially in predicting others errors, and compensating for this. I am also a much calmer & smoother driver. My ability to spot danger in front of me, and to the side with peripheral vision has improved. I suppose I can look forward to this detererating from now on.

Thanks again Guys

 

[peterchurch]

Hi,

Sorry this has gone OT from IAM mebership

Don't take offence I am not putting anyone down for diriving super minis.
The fact is though for 5K you can get a good S/E/C class and run it at the same sort of costs as a new car... So why spend 10K on a new fiesta/cleo/106/saxo etc, That will be worth 2K when you part with it, when you could have already payed for the insurance on the old merc for three years???

I don't read the motoring press to hear about cars, I go and drive them myself instead. Its more fun and most car salespeople are just as happy to go for a drive.

When the megan cabrio was launched I bought a 1.6e (no ABS and a **** engine to boot) kept it for 1 month and sent it back, and got the 2.0 version.
Now that was a different car altogether very fast very good brakes (ABS as standard) and was setup to drive like a bat (it had the retuned Williams engine) IMO This car was much safer because it could out brake and out accelerate every thing it needed to. My fathers mate just got a new Cleo sport. It has the same engine as my 2.0 Megan tuned even harder! yes its quick yes its fun yes you would die in an impact (IMO)

I drove a puma (1.4) and it was horrid. The visabilty sucked and the engine could not pull the skin of a rice pudding

The 1.2 106 that I kept crashing was a pressie to my GF when I swapped my Megan a few months later for a company car. (Yes I also tried the VTR and VTS and they were tremendous fun) However now, having crashed a 1.2 twice, and being crashed in a 1.4 saxo I know that the VTR /VTS/ GT6 are just stupid because there was no extra safety for the massive gain in power.

If you want to know what crashing a saxo sounds like, take an empty coke can and smash it hard on a sturdy surface the noise the can make as it buckles is identical to the sound the bonnet makes as it rides up over the windscreen

Yes the Mini Cooper S is a hoot to drive and I might think about one for a toy if the convertible wasn't such an ugly pig (IMO)

I agree we are on different planets!

The roads of Somerset (and the UK) are riddled with roadside flowers for teenagers that died in car accidents... They are mostly dead because they were driving pocket rockets too fast for the conditions of the road at the time. whether they caused the accident or not...

My previous car to the SL was a MK3 MR2 I put 70K miles on the clock and spent most of the time driving it like mad, Because it sent the right signals to the driver and as you said gave me a buzz because the engine roared and the handling was very good (till you hit an oil patch that is)

I have also sat in the passenger seat of an old Joe Works Cooper while it was doing 135MPH on a strerch I would not want to do 60 in NO ABS NO TRACTION CONTROLS AND NO SENSE ON THE PART OF THE DRIVER...

My point was not that the big cars cover driving faults. The point was that the larger cars will increase the protection offered in the event that matters are taken out of the drivers hands. ABS ESP BAS and so on help regain control in the event that you lose it... Oil on the road perhaps, or black ice...

Its not the cars job to stop you being stupid. That task belongs to your mentors in life and is the second part of driver safety.

Last year I missed an escort carrying four teenagers by less than a foot.
The driver drove straight on to a 60 MPH stretch of road when I was less than 60 hards from them doing guess what 60MPH If I had not had the tools at my disposal I would have most certainly hit the car killing 2 if not all 4 of them. Now if they'd had a propper engine instead of a 1.4 with a carb, they might have stood a chance of out accelerating the mistake and at least getting safely into the ditch on the other side of the road.

The fact is that, kids are stuck driving cars with low powered engines and no safety systems. But this does not stop them geting 100 mph out of them. It just means they sound like a racing car but can't stop if they need to. In the worst case they have no reserve power left if they need it...

I hardly ever race my SL and it has the most powerfull engine I have ever owned It will also, suprisingly out handle my MR2. But the point is the engine nearly always sounds calm and collected so it doen't tempt me to thrash it coz its cool to cruise...

Yes I can see that the TT would provoke more of a racing temptation but at least it has a safety cage and uprated brakes to give the driver a chance.

As I said Im not taking a pot at anyone just stating my preference.

Regards,

Peter

 

[davidsl500]

i think that when you pass the test you are achieving the minimum standard not the maximum.....therefore you should all imporve from that day and have no toruble passing any retests...however that is not what happens today....so driving gets worse unless you are interest in driving, get further training on your own back or by company or such like.....as far as the tax is concerned..he is a thoought...we dont have any money for hospitals yet the found £100m in a box for the tsunami disaster.....hmmmmmm no wonder the roads have holes in....

so i take you point about fog lights an such like but if you are a good driver you will, at all times, have no trouble passsing a test and therefore the argument about failing and losing your job doesnt exsist..unless you are a crap driver,,,,then you shouldn't be driving until you can achive the minimum standard...




so...sorry....thats my view....too dangerous not to have it....

Joe,

Passing the test should be viewed as achieving a minimum acceptable standard - and I dont have a problem with that. I think many people would get a shock if they attempted a driving test today - without preparation for it. Dont forget all those little things / habits that you pick up which will instantly fail you on a test. Crossing your hands on the wheel for instance used to be an absolute no no
and dont forget to make it really obvious when checking your mirrors - I check mine all the time but you wouldnt know it- because my mirrors are properly adjusted and i can flick from one to the other without having to move my head. One of my instructor friends told me a long time ago that the first thing they tell you when you wish to proceed to the advanced level is to forgot the techniques learnt for the standard driving test - that aint going to help you on a retest.

Do I consider myself a good driver? well everyone you ask is going to say yes to that one. I have always had a keen interest in cars. I got my first one at 15 years old and spent 2 years totally stripping and rebuilding it - my father insisted on it - not that i needed any persuading. I passed my test at 17 yrs and 4 months old after just 6 "proper" driving lessons. I have done hillclimb (mostly Shelsley Walsh) and sprint, autotesting, lots of karting and a big of drag (racing not dressing strangely!). I went to good ole Jim Russels racing school at Silverstone back in the late 70's as well. I actually find it quite funny when i go karting now. The young, light weight boy racers turn up in their saxo's, clio's with their big alloys and loud audio and I p*ss all over them on the track because they have no idea about racing lines or handling. These are the people that can drive fast only in straight lines and you find them in ditches on the bends.

Give a 17 year old a big powerful car - why not just give him a machine gun instead.?

In truth there is no substitute for experience and knowing where your vehicles limit is - and also where your own limit is.

oh and happy birthday mucker

 

[SLinKyjoe]

david..thanks.

but i also did say that my idea wasnt popular...am still sticking by it...the minimum standard is the lowest limit.....when an examiner tests an already qualified driver you tend to find they are looking for dangerous things, they are not so bothered with what some people may think are bad habits as it isnt how you were taught. the point here is, do you or did you at anytime not have the car under your full control......


if it is no you fail....no excuse...

but, if we were all subject to a retest we would keep uptodate with the road law as well...as an examiner doesnt fail you when it isnt foggy. but he woudl ask questions which, judging by some peoples standards, they dont know the answer....


so there you go. take a retest..that my postion over here on the right....you can be over there on the left, commie. :grin:

 

[jberks]

I took a taxi drivers test a few years ago. Yes, I know its hard to believe but those lunatic private hire drivers actually have to pass a test to get a licence.
Amusing experience, bloke with the best squadron leader handlebar mustache I've ever seen comes out, gives you vague directions and chats to you constantly as you drive around attempting to keep up the conversation and not hit anything or laugh at his mustache. I guess he's trying to put you off and distract you to see how you handle it.

I think this would be good as a component of a 'mature' driver's re-test, put 2 screaming kids in the back, radio on full and have a mobile ring half way round!