[Closed] Learner drivers on motorways - have we done this yet?

or just stop insurance companies being dirty great big robbing bastards
all they have to do to reach their profit targets is to up premiums

brakes I'm pretty sure it's a free market.

It might go some small way to stopping this

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/middle-lane-hogging-on-m8-motorway ]morons in the middle lane[/url]

In which case it gets my whole-hearted support

Motorways are a lot safer (erm, IMO as I have no statistical evidence to back this up 🙂 ) than a lot of dual carriageways, like the A14 and parts of the A1, where you can also do 70mph but have stupidly short slip roads, cars crossing the carriageway etc. EDIT - & can drive on when learning...

When I learnt to drive my uncle (who is a driving instructor & taught me) took me up the A40 from Greenford to Denham once, as he needed to go to a fishing shop in Denham anyway & thought it would be good practice for me.
I found it a lot easier than a lot of the urban driving scenarios that I encountered while learning to drive.

It might go some small way to stopping this

Or it'll increase it, due to loads of inexperienced/inconfident people too scared to change lanes so they just sit tight in the middle

My oldest did a Pass Plus course after he passed his test, night driving motorway driving etc well worth it

brakes I'm pretty sure it's a free market.

it shouldn't be though, people are too stupid and gullible for a free market to operate to their benefit

I passed by test back in 1993 went to a junior driver club pre 17 which was cool (training plus skid pan - £1 a day) and also upon passing test West Mercia Police gave you the opportunity to have a free 1.5hr motorway tuition session..

most useful.

Motorways are a lot safer (erm, IMO as I have no statistical evidence to back this up ) than a lot of dual carriageways, like the A14 and parts of the A1, where you can also do 70mph but have stupidly short slip roads, cars crossing the carriageway etc. EDIT - & can drive on when learning...

This.

If a lerner is taken on these types of roads and is confident on them then I think they should be encouraged to go on motorways once they pass.
making it a no go area for learners will make it more expensive when the DLA introduce another hoop for drivers to jump through just like they did when they removed the D1 class from those after 97' IIRC

What about making 'P' plates compulsory for the first year after passing your test then?

Not that I think we need any more compulsory legislation

Think its a good thing first thing I did when I passed was go on the motorway its a different enviroment. And hopefully people how to merge on to the motorway, and which lane to use. the amount of people I see pace a lorry while there filtering in and panic when the lane runs out.

It's not just sending them out on motorways that is scary, so is sending them out in the dark / on twisty country lanes / with a car full of mates / in the rain etc etc etc.

The standard test just does not equip new drivers for what they are likely to face. Worse it gives them the confidence that it does. Hence why so many (proportionately) are still being killed and why car accidents remain the biggest single killer of 18-25 yr olds.

Pass Plus goes part of the way but the evidence suggests it is not that effective in addressing behaviour.

Yes, there should be a 'probationary' period with restrictions. No it wouldn't be popular but it does work (as other countries have demonstrated).

Even better, why not introduce a higher level 'advanced' test* after the 'standard' one for everyone?

(*There's one already of course, it's voluntary and run by a charity)

www.iam.org.uk

I passed by test back in 1993 went to a junior driver club pre 17 which was cool (training plus skid pan - £1 a day) and also upon passing test West Mercia Police gave you the opportunity to have a free 1.5hr motorway tuition session..

most useful.

Also my instructor made use of dual carriage ways before my test as a means to do slip roads - lane changing etc luckily they had just built some duals near Shrewsbury! - even had to do part of my test on a route that included a section of dual carriage way.

Best bit for me was Junior driver club - skid pan training was ace and most useful

Some of my lessons were on the A2 in North Kent, which to all intents and purposes was a motorway, just not legally declared as such.
Had a mix of proper motorway style sliproads on/off, and some insanely short uphill A-road sliproads joining from fuel station, in a 1.0 micra where the right pedal tended to make more noise, not more acceleration.
I'm sure many, if not most, learners could get such tuition before their test.

I was thinking about this when I heard it on the radio this morning.

I've always thought it was a big omission that there's no motorway portion of the driving test, but I'm not convinced that putting learners on there is a particularly bright idea.

Maybe what's needed is a two-part test. The current test becomes part 1, then when you pass you swap your Ls for Ps until you pass a harder part 2 which includes a motorway section. You could maybe restrict the vehicle power of P plate holders too, similar to how the non-DAS motorbike test works, or perhaps have a higher age limit for the full test.

Seems to me to be a better idea than "hey, let's fill a rush-hour motorway with inexperienced drivers."

I did Pass Plus which was a good introduction to motorway driving. Motorways are piss easy to drive on, people who seem to panic about them probaly shouldn't be allowed to drive.

All newly passed drivers should be in power limited cars for at least 3 years - 50bhp should be fine 🙂
They do it to motorbikes (to some degree), why haven't they applied the same to cars?

with a car full of mates

This is the biggest thing IMO. A lot of countries don't allow young non-family passengers with young drivers, which I think would make the biggest difference. I tend not to hear of massive crashes caused by lone 17 year olds on motorways, it's usually 5 of them in the car that leaves a country road and hits a tree or whatever. Lots of people = showing off or at best lower concentration.

I learnt on the A3 which is basically a motorway - 3 lanes etc, wasn't remotely phased when I went onto a 'proper' motorway after passing.

Maybe what's needed is a two-part test. The current test becomes part 1, then when you pass you swap your Ls for Ps until you pass a harder part 2 which includes a motorway section. You could maybe restrict the power of P plate holders too, similar to how the non-DAS motorbike test works, or perhaps have a higher age limit for the full test.

Problem is (and this happens with motorbikes), is people take the CBT, and let it run for 2 years then re-take it, of just use 50cc mopeds, and then never take the full test.

So if you transpose that to car's the roads would be clogged with people driving Smart cars and Micras barely able to do 70, they'd probably even be restricted to something nominal like 56mph with the trucks.

Most young people can't afford a big car so restrictions like that wouldn't have any effect anyway, how many 17year olds are driving arround in supercars, whereas a superbike can be had for nissan micra money and is still cheep(ish) to insure.

All newly passed drivers should be in power limited cars for at least 3 years - 50bhp should be fine
They do it to motorbikes (to some degree), why haven't they applied the same to cars?

pretty messed up system, sure I've heard of lessons and tests being cancelled due to inclement conditions but once you've got your licence off you go, snow ice and fog? fill yer boots.
I had done a little DC (50mph) during lessons but moving onto the motorway within 6hours of passing my test was a little nerve racking - as was being a passenger when my Mrs first tried motorway driving.
Pass plus should be mandatory or include night-time and motorway driving on the lessons/test, skid pan may help too. No non family member passengers sounds a good move also

Reported Road accidents involving young car drivers Great Britain: (published 03/02/2011)

Of the 163,554 reported personal injury road accidents, over 42,000 (26%) involved at least one driver aged between 17-24.

191 young drivers were killed (27% of all fatalities),

2,026 young drivers were killed or seriously injured (27% of all KSI casualties).

564 people were killed (25% of total road fatalities) as a result of a young driver car accident.

Of the 2,026 young drivers involved in serious accidents , 71% were male.

Nearly one third of young drivers involved in accidents were aged between 18-19.

Indeed interesting to look at the idea of limiting the cars they drive. The current insurance regime often means they end up driving older lower powered cars.. which handle poorly (brakes and steering) and which have lower NCAP levels. Analysis by one insurance company showed that half those under 20 killed were in cars more than 10 years old.

I've been involved with two projects working with 'problem' young drivers. Most were a danger whatever vehicle they were driving.

I grew up karting so had a heads-up when I learned to drive. When my sis learnt, the first thing I did when she passed was take her to a racetrack and let her get used to dealing with a car in scary situations. Then she did her pass plus and Advanced test. She's now a really confident and safe driver, having only one accident in 10 years which was the other driver's fault (rear ended at lights). On the other hand, out of her friends who passed, all had been in an accident within 1 year, one a very serious one at night on back roads.

Staggered learning is the key, if you're confronted by all the situations at once, you panick. Learn to deal with each one individually and you get confidence and a bank of knowledge to fall back on.

I drove 400 miles to Oban 3 days after I passed my test, without supervision and only my girlfriend in the car for company without incident... I don't see the need at all!!!! I don't even think driving is that dangerous! well not as dangerous as the government and DVLA would have us believe. Total crock.

The vast majority of learners are way better drivers than most experienced drivers

I drove 400 miles to Oban

So up in Scotland? You must have had to deal with, what, 20 other cars in that time? Miracle you survived! 😉

400 miles to oban.... as in from Birmingham. can you do 400 miles to Oban across Scotland without going in circles for half the Journey? 🙂

I don't know why we have a standard test and then recommend people go on pass plus (or whatever) to then learn how to drive in the areas they haven't been taught yet!

I think the practical test should be made up of a number of elements, almost modular I suppose, so that learners are tested on all manner of roads and also at day and night. Send learners on speed & mobile phone awareness courses too - why wait for them to get caught first?

I don't even think driving is that dangerous!

brakes - Member
or just stop insurance companies being dirty great big robbing bastards
all they have to do to reach their profit targets is to up premiums

fraud claims fair enough, ambulance chasers bit less so, if your driver hits me and I say "please give me £100 to fix my bike" chances are you'll say bugger off*, if I get accidentsRus to ask for me you'll pay up along with their exorbitant fee.

Oh and if accidentsRus suggest claiming for whiplash that puts them firmly back into the fraudulent claims bracket rather than ambulance chasers.

* and the system doesn't exactly make it easy for me to do that if it's a hit and run.

D0NK - Member
I don't even think driving is that dangerous!
>2000 deaths per year, biggest single killer of young males, nooooo not dangerous at all.

when you consider there are 30 million lisences its not that big a number.

when you consider there are 30 million lisences its not that big a number.

I saw a news piece the other day about the future of GPS tracked insurance policies. Basically, your car is fitted with a tamper proof GPS box constantly sending data about your driving back to your insurers. If you drive like a dick i.e. speed, late braking etc, it has the ability to cost you in terms of your policy.

Can't see this being a bad thing - I'd encourage it just to stop all the idiots who seem to think the 30mph limit through our village is a 60. I'm sure Audi speedo's are just inaccurate, or non-functioning like their indicators.

Not saying its fine, but its actually quite a small percentage.

2000[b]p.a.[/b] is still a hell of a lot of dead people

prezet I'm normally quick to don a tin foil hat but think that sort of thing would be a good idea, of course it'd be against drivers human rights and all sorts of other bollocks but if you could fit some kind of telemetry that didn't report back to big brother in normal use but could be checked in the case of an accident or you were reported of causing an accident...then yeah think it might be a good move.

I'd happily have a GPS tracker if it meant lower premiums. If you don't think the insurers will give you a lower premium once they've 'seen' your driving then maybe it's the driving that needs looking at. either that or opt out of the system but risk being bundled in the same group as those 'less safe'.

2000p.a. is still a hell of a lot of dead people

But only about 0.2% of all deaths.

You are 100 times more likely to die from cancer.

But only about 0.2% of all deaths.

You are 100 times more likely to die from cancer.

Over a lifetime, definitely , but not if you're 19.

Cancer is predominantly a killer of the elderly. If you were to look at road deaths in terms of life years lost, which is imo the sensible way to do it, then the impact inevitably rises compared with a straight numerical comparison.

No-one is suggesting spending an equivalent resource on road death prevention that we spend on cancer treatment and prevention, but there is a strong argument for increased spend in this area.