Muppets on the road

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Muppets on the road

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 34

49 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 11

Reply # 1012420 25-Mar-2014 13:27

thecatsgoolies: For a minute I thought you were talking about me hee hee. Favorite subject of course and just had a discussion with the nearly 16 year old telling me in 2 months time he will be on the road.
I'm filled with dread to be honest. I want him to have professional lessons not to be taught bad habits from his father but instead to learn proper skills. I believe all new drivers should be taught to drive properly. I've never seen such bad and slack driving since I've been here.

The Restricted License test is very strict now. My wife recently passed the test (after holding her learners for 10+ years, long story), and without professional lessons there is no way she would have passed.

I have been driving for 20+ years and if she had sat it based purely on my advice/understanding there would have been multiple points of failure. They are very pedantic about what they want to see and tiny 'errors' will result in automatic failure of the test.

So, while this is encouraging for the future, it obviously has little impact on the 99% of existing drivers!

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
58928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10298

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 1012431 25-Mar-2014 13:29

Is there need for people to quote a wall of text? Edited the previous post.

Geekzone broadband switch | Amazon (Geekzone aff) | MightyApe (Geekzone aff) | Backblaze cloud backup (personal and business) | My technology disclosure

JimmyCorrigan

49 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 11

Reply # 1012445 25-Mar-2014 13:33

freitasm: Is there need for people to quote a wall of text? Edited the previous post.

(Sorry about that - tried to remove a chunk and inadvertantly cut off some of the tags, resulting in a failure-to-post. Then managed to post it all. Not winning.)

jc

Technofreak

2572 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 370

Reply # 1012524 25-Mar-2014 14:45

JimmyCorrigan:
The Restricted License test is very strict now. My wife recently passed the test (after holding her learners for 10+ years, long story), and without professional lessons there is no way she would have passed.

I have been driving for 20+ years and if she had sat it based purely on my advice/understanding there would have been multiple points of failure. They are very pedantic about what they want to see and tiny 'errors' will result in automatic failure of the test.

So, while this is encouraging for the future, it obviously has little impact on the 99% of existing drivers!

There seems to be continual murmurings about pedantic driver testing officers, I don't know how true they are If they are true I don't agree that pedantic testing will improve driver standards.

I have been involved with pilot training for many years, both preparing pilots for flight tests and assessing them for competency. It isn't realistic to see a perfect performance during a test.

You look at the overall performance and any areas that are not perfect you look at the risk (is it going to cause an accident or injury or just a possible minor incident) and pass or fail accordingly. Sure there might be some talking points at the debrief but having some areas that are not perfect doesn't mean a fail.

There are people who could pass all the test requirements BUT are still not suitable to hold a licence. They will do everything right on the day and the moment they have their licence will do what suits them. The right attitude means a hell of a lot. Someone who might not be perfect technically might still be a much better driver over all.

Jolla C
Nokia N1
Nokia N9
Nokia E7
HP Touchpad
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

JimmyCorrigan

49 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 11

Reply # 1012534 25-Mar-2014 15:18

Technofreak:

There seems to be continual murmurings about pedantic driver testing officers, I don't know how true they are If they are true I don't agree that pedantic testing will improve driver standards.

I have been involved with pilot training for many years, both preparing pilots for flight tests and assessing them for competency. It isn't realistic to see a perfect performance during a test.

You look at the overall performance and any areas that are not perfect you look at the risk (is it going to cause an accident or injury or just a possible minor incident) and pass or fail accordingly. Sure there might be some talking points at the debrief but having some areas that are not perfect doesn't mean a fail.

There are people who could pass all the test requirements BUT are still not suitable to hold a licence. They will do everything right on the day and the moment they have their licence will do what suits them. The right attitude means a hell of a lot. Someone who might not be perfect technically might still be a much better driver over all.

Yes, you would think that demonstrating a sufficient level of competence and confidence would be preferable, but I guess that kind of ‘assessing to a standard' is much tougher to control and justify than ticking some boxes.

This is exactly why I suspect most experienced drivers would fail the test. It is the largely irrelevant minutiae you don't know about that they will fault you on, not your actual ability.

(eg – in the test, if you cut a solid white line changing lanes, it is an automatic fail. I have not seen a road code in years, admittedly, but I would not have thought it was a particularly serious offence!)

jonathan18

2619 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 620

Reply # 1012543 25-Mar-2014 15:38

JimmyCorrigan: Yes, you would think that demonstrating a sufficient level of competence and confidence would be preferable, but I guess that kind of ‘assessing to a standard' is much tougher to control and justify than ticking some boxes. This is exactly why I suspect most experienced drivers would fail the test. It is the largely irrelevant minutiae you don't know about that they will fault you on, not your actual ability. (eg – in the test, if you cut a solid white line changing lanes, it is an automatic fail. I have not seen a road code in years, admittedly, but I would not have thought it was a particularly serious offence!)

I think that most current licence-holders would fail a re-sit on more fundamental issues than the (argubly) pedantic matters you're referring to - it goes back to some of the bigger issues talked about earlier in this thread such as a complete failure to indicate (many drivers think it's optional in many cases, eg coming out of a driveway), apparent inability to indicate correctly on a roundabout, not coming to a stop at a stop sign, failing to turn into the correct lane at an intersection... the list goes on.

All these add up to something quite siginficant, and are evidence of the poor standard of driving in this country.

As somebody who only got around to getting my full licence about three years back (and I took the precaution of getting a single lesson prior to sitting it to ensure I knew the necessary "tricks") I found the hammering home of some of the basics such as checking the mirror regularly and ALWAYS indicating still serve me well today. Not sure if I stick to the "never go over 50km/hr" mantra though!

MikeB4

Onward
11287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5013

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1012553 25-Mar-2014 16:01

One person supports this post

jonathan18:
JimmyCorrigan: Yes, you would think that demonstrating a sufficient level of competence and confidence would be preferable, but I guess that kind of ‘assessing to a standard' is much tougher to control and justify than ticking some boxes. This is exactly why I suspect most experienced drivers would fail the test. It is the largely irrelevant minutiae you don't know about that they will fault you on, not your actual ability. (eg – in the test, if you cut a solid white line changing lanes, it is an automatic fail. I have not seen a road code in years, admittedly, but I would not have thought it was a particularly serious offence!)

I think that most current licence-holders would fail a re-sit on more fundamental issues than the (argubly) pedantic matters you're referring to - it goes back to some of the bigger issues talked about earlier in this thread such as a complete failure to indicate (many drivers think it's optional in many cases, eg coming out of a driveway), apparent inability to indicate correctly on a roundabout, not coming to a stop at a stop sign, failing to turn into the correct lane at an intersection... the list goes on.

All these add up to something quite siginficant, and are evidence of the poor standard of driving in this country.

As somebody who only got around to getting my full licence about three years back (and I took the precaution of getting a single lesson prior to sitting it to ensure I knew the necessary "tricks") I found the hammering home of some of the basics such as checking the mirror regularly and ALWAYS indicating still serve me well today. Not sure if I stick to the "never go over 50km/hr" mantra though!

I see these as being fundamental in why NZ has a bad rep for driving....

1. Aggression.
2. Protection of ones patch on the road and not letting people merge like a zip etc, not giving sufficient space to other road users like cyclists
3. The roads are a play ground.
4. The speed legal maximum limit is a target all must achieve and not a limit given the prevailing circumstances
5. Failure to indicate
6. Failure to follow the 2 second rule
7. Drink driving
8. Non licenced or under licences drivers.
9. Bus drivers failing to follow the road code as are cyclists

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
58928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10298

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 1012612 25-Mar-2014 18:09

3 people support this post

KiwiNZ:
4. The speed legal maximum limit is a target all must achieve and not a limit given the prevailing circumstances

This one is a special case though. If you have a three lane motorway, it's sunny, middle of the day, with relatively low traffic, a muppet driving at 80km/h on the fast lane is nothing more than a muppet.

The speed is not a target but there's no reason for people to do less than the marked speed if there are other lanes available.

Geekzone broadband switch | Amazon (Geekzone aff) | MightyApe (Geekzone aff) | Backblaze cloud backup (personal and business) | My technology disclosure

Buzz Bumble

332 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 61
Inactive user

Reply # 1012624 25-Mar-2014 18:29

freitasm: The speed is not a target but there's no reason for people to do less than the marked speed if there are other lanes available.

There's lots of possible reasons - pelting rain, fog, morons in the other lanes not letting you move over (see point 2. above), the "fast lane" being the lane needed to go where you want to go, problems ahead that you can't see but they can, etc., etc.

Technofreak

2572 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 370

Reply # 1012626 25-Mar-2014 18:33

3 people support this post

Buzz Bumble:
freitasm: The speed is not a target but there's no reason for people to do less than the marked speed if there are other lanes available.

There's lots of possible reasons - pelting rain, fog, morons in the other lanes not letting you move over (see point 2. above), the "fast lane" being the lane needed to go where you want to go, problems ahead that you can't see but they can, etc., etc.

Most often none of those reason apply, they are just morons as Mauricio says. Notice he also said "if there are other lanes available".

Jolla C
Nokia N1
Nokia N9
Nokia E7
HP Touchpad
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
58928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10298

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 1012628 25-Mar-2014 18:37

2 people support this post

As above. I put conditions in my post - sunny, midday, available lanes. You tried to negate all those to justify something, but that wasn't my point.

Geekzone broadband switch | Amazon (Geekzone aff) | MightyApe (Geekzone aff) | Backblaze cloud backup (personal and business) | My technology disclosure

Buzz Bumble

332 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 61
Inactive user

Reply # 1012660 25-Mar-2014 19:31

I took them as two separate statements since they were posted as two separate paragraphs.

ubernoob

505 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 71

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1012669 25-Mar-2014 19:47

One person supports this post

freitasm:
KiwiNZ:
4. The speed legal maximum limit is a target all must achieve and not a limit given the prevailing circumstances

This one is a special case though. If you have a three lane motorway, it's sunny, middle of the day, with relatively low traffic, a muppet driving at 80km/h on the fast lane is nothing more than a muppet.

The speed is not a target but there's no reason for people to do less than the marked speed if there are other lanes available.

I think it should be a target. As you say, someone travelling at 80 in a 100 zone is just as much a nuisance as someone tailing you trying to do 120. If our speedos were accurate we could all do 100, no-one makes silly overtaking mistakes, no-one holds up traffic.... with the development of "Driverless" vehicles this could all be negated in the near future...but where's the fun in that

MikeB4

Onward
11287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5013

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1012684 25-Mar-2014 19:50

ubernoob:
freitasm:
KiwiNZ:
4. The speed legal maximum limit is a target all must achieve and not a limit given the prevailing circumstances

This one is a special case though. If you have a three lane motorway, it's sunny, middle of the day, with relatively low traffic, a muppet driving at 80km/h on the fast lane is nothing more than a muppet.

The speed is not a target but there's no reason for people to do less than the marked speed if there are other lanes available.

I think it should be a target. As you say, someone travelling at 80 in a 100 zone is just as much a nuisance as someone tailing you trying to do 120. If our speedos were accurate we could all do 100, no-one makes silly overtaking mistakes, no-one holds up traffic.... with the development of "Driverless" vehicles this could all be negated in the near future...but where's the fun in that

There is often occasions that traveling at 100km/h is not safe, that is why you can get ticketed doing so.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

blakamin

Aussie
3860 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 996

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1012689 25-Mar-2014 19:56

2 people support this post

KiwiNZ:

There is often occasions that traveling at 100km/h is not safe, that is why you can get ticketed doing so.

And you'll probably see that about as often they ticket people doing 70 in a 100 zone.... Road conditions on *most* highways in NZ should allow you to travel with 10km/h of the speed limit unless it's a major downpour or a traffic jam. If you're not doing it because it's spitting rain/cloudy/or you don't "feel safe" you shouldn't be on the road.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 34