Speeding -- it's not just the fine and/or the ban

[Nod]

Exactly my point, Bernie! It's the unexpected that makes speed in urban environments inherently dangerous, that's why there are 20 limits near schools and in many other areas where there are high concentrations of pedestrians (and here, where there's any likelihood of drunk students...) At 30 there's a far lower likelihood of an incident being fatal than at even a relatively modest 40 while at 80 the probability is a fatality rather than an injury. The above is all ignoring the actual thinking and stopping distances at speed too - at 20, there's a reasonable chance to hit the brakes in time but at 40, it's splat.

 

[Garry Edwards]

In my experience, high speed driving is one of the few specialist areas in which the (best trained) police drivers really excel. Almost everyone thinks that they're an expert driver but the reality is that without specialised training, that has to be an illusion.

Personally, I've had over 50 years of driving experience, from motorbikes to cars to vans to HGV's, tractors - everything really except a bus - but I've never had any training to drive other than in accordance with my various licenses, so I cannot be in the same class as people trained to drive emergency vehicles.

 

[Nod]

I'm not saying that police drivers are any worse than us mere mortals, only that high speeds are unsafe in urban environments however good and well trained the driver might be. Can't find any info as to the level of driver involved in the Bristol incident but I would suspect (due to blues and 2s and responding to a 999) that it was #2 in Bernie's list rather than a full pursuit trained driver.

 

[Byker28i]

Chas

No.

The force I was there were 4 levels of driver, it's most likely changed a bit since.
1.Basic - No course, just a DfT Licence needed, sometimes a check test given. Can drive a 'panda' type car, not supposed to use Blue Lights while moving (although thats guideline again, not legislation based)
2. Standard - 3 week course, nearly all practical. Introduction to skid pan, high speed ish.
3. Standard van. 2 day course, mostly going backwards, with some towing...That bit was going forward. I understand this is no longer a course.
4. Advanced - used to be 10 weeks, in 2 parts. Lord only knows how long now.

Not everyone is a driver, A guy I knew couldn't drive at all, and never bothered to learn.

You have 4 levels of Police driver.

Level 4 = Basic driver (No Police training, not allowed to use exemptions - but can drive any Police vehicle that his DVLA licence covers him for)
Level 3 = Response driver (Has received response training so allowed to use exemptions in low power vehicles - as basic for higher powered)
Level 2 = Advanced driver (Has received advanced training so allowed to use exemptions in low/high power vehicles - Non tactical pursuit)
Level 1 = Advanced driver (As level 2 but also trained/authorised for tactical pursuit).

Class 1 & 2 relate to successfully completing a Level 1 course but different grades (percentage marks) received. 1 being higher than 2.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

You have 4 levels of Police driver.

Level 4 = Basic driver (No Police training, not allowed to use exemptions - but can drive any Police vehicle that his DVLA licence covers him for)
Level 3 = Response driver (Has received response training so allowed to use exemptions in low power vehicles - as basic for higher powered)
Level 2 = Advanced driver (Has received advanced training so allowed to use exemptions in low/high power vehicles - Non tactical pursuit)
Level 1 = Advanced driver (As level 2 but also trained/authorised for tactical pursuit).

Class 1 & 2 relate to successfully completing a Level 1 course but different grades (percentage marks) received. 1 being higher than 2.

level 4 - to drive a police vehicle you still have to be assessed by someone from the police driving school before you are authorised to drive a police vehicle. Although there are National ACPO guidelines each force is responsible for their own driver training and policy. It does vary from force-to-force.

 

[Bernie174]

Nod

If it was as simple as that, the rate of serious injury and death accidents would be far higher than it is. The difference is training and the way we are trained to drive.

The difference is style of driving, and that's very much defensive. Of course you can't take into account every eventuality, if you had did, no vehicle would ever move. But you can mitigate it, look for some form of recognition from pedestrians that you are there, positioning etc.

The essential difference is what and where we were trained to look at. My issue with most drivers is just that, yes, they can put their foot down and car goes fast. Great, any idiot can do that, it's really easy. It's what people are seeing or not that worries me. When passenger in a car being driven to fast, it's obvious what the driver has seen, or not in most cases, and what they are doing to mitigate the hazard, or again, not in most cases. Thats why I hate being driven. Yes, I hear the "I am a good driver" time and time again, no, most people really are not. They simply judge it on if they've had an accident. the fact is, if they haven't it's mostly luck, not skill.

So Police/emergency services drivers are equipped with the skills to recognize a hazard, and to do so a very very long way back from it. That comes with training, and constant practice. The general public don't get those skills to start with, and don't develop them at all, which is why they kill so many of each other.

Byker...What he said!
Besides, as I said before the legislation is different from guidelines, and guidelines are not legislation. In other words, the fact a guideline says you can't, isn't evidence to prosecute with. The act does not specify driver levels for exemptions, its all police vehicles. Yes, a Force can try to prosecute, but it'll get no where. Braking a speed limit when a Police Officer in law does not require anyones authority, provided you can show a necessity.

In my force, both 1 and 2 are officially advanced drivers and can do exactly the same thing. The marks they get is the only difference. They can both, provided they've been pursuit trained which is a bit part of the advanced course do chases, and the only difference it makes in reality is that to get a job on the flying squad as a driver or other popular jobs like that, you have far less chance as a 2, simply because there's some elitism and plenty of 1's.

 

[Cobra]

Yes, I hear the "I am a good driver" time and time again, no, most people really are not. They simply judge it on if they've had an accident. the fact is, if they haven't it's mostly luck, not skill.

But luck runs out at some point, law of averages and all that.

So Police/emergency services drivers are equipped with the skills to recognize a hazard, and to do so a very very long way back from it. That comes with training, and constant practice.

But that's basic road craft! Although admittedly many do drive by the seat of their pants,
Especially the young "invulnerable" ones
But also many other experienced, (or does experience count for nowt?)
"civilian" drivers do it all day long.
Know how to "handle" icy / wet slippery roads, use mirrors (all of them)
look into the distance to see what's happing, not just checking the colour of their bonnet.
Many of us know how to correct an issue before its even began, or at latest, the slightest twitch of the wheels.
Or suspect that the person half a mile away, may cross on their red light,

Yes I don't doubt that police drivers are shown how to and are trained how to.
But some of us older drivers have experienced far more than the young coppers on a skid pan
or the theories of a classroom.
We have been out there and done it for years.

Yes I was also taught that everyone else on the road is a bloody idiot,
no matter what they drive or who they are.
Its served me well for many years too.

 

[Nod]

Urban environments are full - jam packed full - of hazards. Every parked car could be hiding a child (yes, even at night), dog, drunk, whatever. However good your training and reflexes, even 40 is too fast. Throw in a great big dose of adrenaline and the distractions of incoming radio messages and it's a wonder so few people get killed by dangerously driven emergency service vehicles.

 

[big soft moose]

You have 4 levels of Police driver.

Level 4 = Basic driver (No Police training, not allowed to use exemptions - but can drive any Police vehicle that his DVLA licence covers him for)
Level 3 = Response driver (Has received response training so allowed to use exemptions in low power vehicles - as basic for higher powered)
Level 2 = Advanced driver (Has received advanced training so allowed to use exemptions in low/high power vehicles - Non tactical pursuit)
Level 1 = Advanced driver (As level 2 but also trained/authorised for tactical pursuit).

Class 1 & 2 relate to successfully completing a Level 1 course but different grades (percentage marks) received. 1 being higher than 2.

which level qualifies you to drive like an utter prat while 'testing' a new vehicle ?

 

[Bernie174]

Nod

Urban environments are full - jam packed full - of hazards. Every parked car could be hiding a child (yes, even at night), dog, drunk, whatever. However good your training and reflexes, even 40 is too fast. Throw in a great big dose of adrenaline and the distractions of incoming radio messages and it's a wonder so few people get killed by dangerously driven emergency service vehicles.

Yes, all of those hazards are present, and mitigated for, as I said. If it was as big an issue as you seem to think, why is the accident rate as low as it is? That speaks for it's self.

Cobra

But that's basic road craft! Although admittedly many do drive by the seat of their pants,

Thats the problem, I don't doubt that many drivers can use their mirrors, sad fact is they don't. Same with looking further than the end of their bonnet, they may know how, but they don't actually do it!

I have only been in a car with one driver that wasn't properly trained and felt safe, and she was an exception. Most scare me witless. Simply because they don't things that you claim they do all day long. I do 145 miles most days, I see the same things you claim as being what experienced drivers do, not being done. I see the results of the same issues, not looking ahead, no anticipation, distances not kept, accelerating into a hazard, not using mirrors, bad positioning....The list is endless.

But worse than that, it's the complete ignorance of their faults that is the issue, and the assumption that because they have a car thats capable of high speed driving, that they are equally capable. In most cases they really aren't.

 

[Byker28i]

which level qualifies you to drive like an utter prat while 'testing' a new vehicle ?

As mentioned, the drive was rated as class 1, testified in court to be the 'creme de la creme' of police drivers.

 

[Byker28i]

Bernie, sorry on mobile so not quoting but, guidelines and in my force...

The trouble is, with multiple forces being their own authority with their own interpretations, then different 'rules' seem to apply depending on your location. It really is about time we had one joined up police force rather than many.

 

[Bernie174]

Byker.

I think I get your point.

National Guidelines are the reason why you go in the book for speeding at limit +10% + 2 mph. Wouldn't it be better if it was discretionary?

Thats the biggest issue Police as an entity faces these days, to may prescriptive guidelines, too much process, not enough reality.

So no, I wouldn't agree with guidelines being either enshrined in law, or being national, in reality I'd prefer most of them to be binned. But there are there to absolve those in the higher echelons of responsibility when things go wrong. They simply lean back and mutter "Well, they've been told".

The law provides for, in the case of excess speed a defence for Police Officers. Thats wide enough to account for most eventualities. To try and narrow that to silly prescriptive practice is nothing short of lunacy.

As an example, your home is being broken into, you are being attacked by Billy the Burglar, and not giving a good account of yourself. There is only a basic driver on duty and he's 15 miles away. The roads between you and him are all urban, with 30mph limits. At a speed of 30, not taking into account he has to stop at every red light, accord precedence at every pedestrian crossing it will take him 30 minutes to get to you. Now are you happy with that idea? I am reasonably certain if that happened you'd be on here screaming from the rooftops about how long it took police to turn up. Yet it's only a guideline stopping him from going faster, the law says he can.

Same circumstances, but an advanced driver in a station van. He's done everything he should prior to taking the vehicle out, including a moving brakes test, but it's the first time he's driven that vehicle. an hour after he's left the station, and yours is the first call he's taken. So blues/twos on and he's off, at 40, he brakes for a junction, and there's a loud bang from the back of the van, and the vehicle lurches so violently to the left it mounts the pavement and kills someone. Can't happen? It can, apart from the pedestrian, it's exactly what happened to me, but I only killed a bollard! Had I (in my case I didn't have the opportunity, I'd been going to minor incident after minor incident for the first hour)or my fictional driver been able to do some proper famil with the vehicle, then the fault with the vehicle load sensing spring would have become apparent, and the vehicle take off the road. But the Guidelines say now you can't do famil, and besides, you think it's playing, so nooooo can't have policemen doing that can we, and BSM doesn't like it, he thinks its driving like a 'prat'. But the law sensibly allows for it , there's case law on police driver training.

The problem here is that some people think because aren't allowed to do things, no one should be able to. Throw in a baseless assumption of 'playing', because they don't appreciate that to drive fast you need to have confidence in your own ability and the vehicle and that confidence isn't based on the car having a steering wheel alone.

So you get what you wish for, but with that wish comes consequences, and the full consequence of process and guideline based policing are yet to hit.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Byker.

I think I get your point.

National Guidelines are the reason why you go in the book for speeding at limit +10% + 2 mph. Wouldn't it be better if it was discretionary?

Thats the biggest issue Police as an entity faces these days, to may prescriptive guidelines, too much process, not enough reality.

So no, I wouldn't agree with guidelines being either enshrined in law, or being national, in reality I'd prefer most of them to be binned. But there are there to absolve those in the higher echelons of responsibility when things go wrong. They simply lean back and mutter "Well, they've been told".

The law provides for, in the case of excess speed a defence for Police Officers. Thats wide enough to account for most eventualities. To try and narrow that to silly prescriptive practice is nothing short of lunacy.

As an example, your home is being broken into, you are being attacked by Billy the Burglar, and not giving a good account of yourself. There is only a basic driver on duty and he's 15 miles away. The roads between you and him are all urban, with 30mph limits. At a speed of 30, not taking into account he has to stop at every red light, accord precedence at every pedestrian crossing it will take him 30 minutes to get to you. Now are you happy with that idea? I am reasonably certain if that happened you'd be on here screaming from the rooftops about how long it took police to turn up. Yet it's only a guideline stopping him from going faster, the law says he can.

Same circumstances, but an advanced driver in a station van. He's done everything he should prior to taking the vehicle out, including a moving brakes test, but it's the first time he's driven that vehicle. an hour after he's left the station, and yours is the first call he's taken. So blues/twos on and he's off, at 40, he brakes for a junction, and there's a loud bang from the back of the van, and the vehicle lurches so violently to the left it mounts the pavement and kills someone. Can't happen? It can, apart from the pedestrian, it's exactly what happened to me, but I only killed a bollard! Had I (in my case I didn't have the opportunity, I'd been going to minor incident after minor incident for the first hour)or my fictional driver been able to do some proper famil with the vehicle, then the fault with the vehicle load sensing spring would have become apparent, and the vehicle take off the road. But the Guidelines say now you can't do famil, and besides, you think it's playing, so nooooo can't have policemen doing that can we, and BSM doesn't like it, he thinks its driving like a 'prat'. But the law sensibly allows for it , there's case law on police driver training.

The problem here is that some people think because aren't allowed to do things, no one should be able to. Throw in a baseless assumption of 'playing', because they don't appreciate that to drive fast you need to have confidence in your own ability and the vehicle and that confidence isn't based on the car having a steering wheel alone.

So you get what you wish for, but with that wish comes consequences, and the full consequence of process and guideline based policing are yet to hit.

I accept most of what you say and I fully accept the need for any driver to familiarise with the characteristics of the vehicle.
BUT the public perception is that although it has to be acceptable to drive very fast in a genuine emergency, simply because it is an emergency and risks need to be balanced, it is no more acceptable for a police officer to drive at insane speeds in populated areas than it is for the public to do so when it isn't an emergency.

I don't blame individual police officers for taking advantage of their legal exemptions, but I do blame the police forces for not providing them with somewhere safe to do it - a track where there are no other vehicles, no people and minimal risk if something goes wrong.

One of the biggest problems with the attitude of most members of the public is, IMO, perception - the public doesn't know what happens, and that is largely because the police don't tell them. There are obviously often good operational reasons why the police are so tight lipped, and there can be legal reasons too, but the fact remains that despite employing a lot of very highly paid senior officers to deal with the press, the normal response is "No comment" - which is just as ineffective from a PR viewpoint as it is when someone is being questioned about their actions by police...

 

[JonathanRyan]

We all want our police to drive as fast as possible when coming to our aid. The price for that is the occasional tragedy.

 

[SFTPhotography]

We all want our police to drive as fast as possible when coming to our aid. The price for that is the occasional tragedy.

Pretty much agree with this.

 

[Bernie174]

As I said before, tracks are not indicative of roads. They are designed for high speed driving, aren't covered in potholes, drains etc, and are a lot wider!

So the idea that you can go to a track and that somehow tells you all about the vehicle is nonsense. Thats leaving aside, for example when I worked in south London, that we'd need to move 20 or so vehicles, and 120 officers to a track. The nearest being Brands, or Thruxton that I can think of, it's not going to happen. To suggest otherwise isn't realistic.

To practice on the roads I Policed though makes sense, if it's safe for me to do say 90 down Clapham common South side on a call, then it is no less safe because I am training or on famil. More so, as I'd pick my times. I wasn't likely to do it at 5pm, in the rush hour, but at 3.30am, its of little or no danger to anyone. And before you say, "Ah, but you leap into a car and do 90, so you are defeating your own argument", I don't, I get in in and work up to that. Seeing what the brakes and steering do at various speeds and conditions.

Public perception, well, if say Byker wants to jump to a conclusion, then so be it. It would happen anyway, whether I was on a call or not. Should everything be explained to people? Up to a point, but you'd spend all your time justifying something to a small minority, to the detriment of getting on with what Police are paid to do, and constantly having to deal with the "Yer but, Yer but, Yer but...It's so unfair, I'm not allowed to do it so no one else should...." etc.

If you want evidence of that, I've explained all of this ad nausea, and dealt with the tracks issue at least once already, yet you are still asking the same questions. So in short, yes they can practice, yes it is within the law, and yes they do it on roads. They don't use tracks because it's impractical, and besides they aren't roads so tell you little. It's no less safe than going to a call, and it's not done at a some when the roads are packed with other cars.

 

[Cobra]

I have only been in a car with one driver that wasn't properly trained and felt safe, and she was an exception. Most scare me witless. Simply because they don't things that you claim they do all day long. I do 145 miles most days, I see the same things you claim as being what experienced drivers do, not being done. I see the results of the same issues, not looking ahead, no anticipation, distances not kept, accelerating into a hazard, not using mirrors, bad positioning....The list is endless.

But worse than that, it's the complete ignorance of their faults that is the issue, and the assumption that because they have a car that's capable of high speed driving, that they are equally capable. In most cases they really aren't.

Generally I would agree, but its the assumption that only police "Drivers" are able to drive,
that you keep referring back to, that get peoples backs up.

2 points
1) when the local force were given 2.8 capris
as pursuit cars, (Ok so that was a few years ago) they were both written off
very quickly, yes it was all over the local press.

2) I have only been in a car, with one police trained driver,
And if that is the standard, well count me out!
And as to how he ever hit that tractor, I shall never know!
Well actually I do, he didn't read the conditions,
Didn't take the correct action in advance etc etc.

So MY PERSONAL experience and knowledge proves exactly the opposite,
to what you are saying.
Its all down to perception there are good and bad drivers in ALL walks of life and professions

 

[SFTPhotography]

Didn't PC Middleton have quite a big off a few years later?

 

[Blank_Canvas]

All road fatal RTCs are sad. However, Police Officers are not exempt from it , I am aware of at least two Officers who died on duty while responding to calls. One in a vehicle, the other on a motorcycle. Two different cases, both tragic cases. The statistics are very small but it happens in all walks of life.

 

[Nod]

Chris, we had similar cases soon after the XR4x4 was released - all the ones tested by the local force got written off by overexuberance when the talent/confidence curve became dead man's bend. You'd have though they would have learned after the first one or 2.

 

[Bernie174]

2 points
1) when the local force were given 2.8 capris
as pursuit cars, (Ok so that was a few years ago) they were both written off
very quickly, yes it was all over the local press.

Quite apart from the fact that was obviously a very long time ago, you haven't included the accident report, so how are we to conclude if that was due to police driving?

2) I have only been in a car, with one police trained driver,
And if that is the standard, well count me out!
And as to how he ever hit that tractor, I shall never know!
Well actually I do, he didn't read the conditions,
Didn't take the correct action in advance etc etc.

If you want to get into a peeing competition, we could be here for the next 20 years, I've been to 1000's of accidents, and and usually one party or the other is at fault, and almost every single one of those has been non emergency service trained drivers.

So all we have established is that not everyone's perfect, but in my opinion, and thats based on dealing with the mess you 'drivers' make, I'd prefer not to be driven by the vast majority of you.

If that gets up your nose, I don't care. Do something about it, improve driver standards, then the comment wouldn't be necessary. In any case, the fact that the majority of drivers are poor, doesn't have anything to do with police drivers and the exemptions they have. You don't need to drive fast. If you don't want police too, then write to your MP. In the unlikely event that achieves anything, you only have yourself to blame when you don't get police when you really need them.

Steve

Didn't PC Middleton have quite a big off a few years later?

Keep up, we've been through that!

 

[Cobra]

Quite apart from the fact that was obviously a very long time ago, you haven't included the accident report, so how are we to conclude if that was due to police driving?

No one else was driving, apart from the police.
If you or they are so perfect, it wouldn't have happened.
No matter what the road conditions were.

So all we have established is that not everyone's perfect, but in my opinion, and thats based on dealing with the mess you 'drivers' make, I'd prefer not to be driven by the vast majority of you.

And my personal experience as above, say the same about "you specialists"

If that gets up your nose, I don't care. Do something about it, improve driver standards,

I don't need to "do" anything about it,
I am am confident in my own abilities and that includes having to think and drive
for the "immortal" drivers.
Having covered hundreds of thousands of miles,
in anything from a van to a 55 foot artic.
Yes, carrying fuel, or even worse, an empty tanker will sharpen your wits.

You don't need to drive fast. If you don't want police too, then write to your MP.

That was never any concern, of mine its you that keeps banging on about the only safe fast drive is a copper.
I think that's been disproved a few times, now over the various threads.

 

[big soft moose]

2 points
1) when the local force were given 2.8 capris
as pursuit cars, (Ok so that was a few years ago) they were both written off
very quickly, yes it was all over the local press.

bodie and doyle never lived it down either

 

[Cobra]

bodie and doyle never lived it down either

Ah but that was the more tail happy 3.0l
The 2.8 is was much more stable and much harder to "lose"
But not impossible it would seem

 

[Bernie174]

That was never any concern, of mine its you that keeps banging on about the only safe fast drive is a copper.

I hope you drive better than you read. I said originally, and have said numerous times since, "Emergency Service" trained drivers, not just police. As they are trained to a similar standard, it seems pointless typing extra words every time I mention that group.

Nor have I said Police drivers are perfect. Again, read what I said, I've had 4 accidents in Police Cars. One of which was my fault..ish. Which probably happened around the same time as your Capri accidents. You still haven't included the accident reports though, and without those you can't say that the accidents were down to the officers driving them. In other words it's a pointless example. To conclude it was simply because you say there were no other cars involved is simplistic and says you've never investigated an accident.

But irrespective of that, I stand by what I've said. You can claim, like everyone here will no doubt, that you, and they are good drivers. But thats a bit me like saying I am a lover of the caliber of Casanova, it proves nothing at all.

You'll also recall, that I said there are non emergency service drivers who are good, the lady I mentioned some time ago in this. But she is a rarity, and about the only non ES driver I've been in a var with who I did trust.

 

[Cobra]

You still haven't included the accident reports though,

I can't as you full well know,
The media may well embellish a story for the readership,
but it has to be based on fact or they would be sued for liable or what ever the term is

and without those you can't say that the accidents were down to the officers driving them. In other words it's a pointless example.

And you have never produced any accident reports
to substantiate your claims of carnage
by us mere mortals.
I guess this is what you call a stale mate.
Me not believing that the police are the the expert drivers you claim them to be,
and you refusing to believe that civilians are capable of driving correctly.

 

[big soft moose]

I guess this is what you call a stale mate.
Me not believing that the police are the the expert drivers you claim them to be,
and you refusing to believe that civilians are capable of driving correctly.

i suspect the sailent word missing from both your positions is some - some civilians are capable of driving correctly (though some drive like total bell ends) some police are about as safe behind the wheel as a small wombat , but some , may be even most , are well trained experts

can i suggest that the two of you get a room and .... ahem.... make up (with all that anger and frustration it can only be good )

 

[Cobra]

can i suggest that the two of you get a room and .... ahem.... make up (with all that anger and frustration it can only be good )

After you trying to hump my leg in the other thread,
I'd hate for you to get jealous TBH

 

[big soft moose]

I don't mind sharing - i hear that theres plenty of you to go arround

 

[Cobra]

I don't mind sharing - i hear that theres plenty of you to go arround

Thats sorted then

 

[Bernie174]

Me not believing that the police are the the expert drivers you claim them to be,
and you refusing to believe that civilians are capable of driving correctly.

Whether they are capable of driving correctly or not isn't the point I've been trying to make. Some can and do, I have (for the third time!) already conceded that. My point is the vast majority don't.
My point over the accident reports, and yes I know you wouldn't be able to produce them was that you were using press reports of 2 very old incidents to prove your point. As a great deal of whats's reported in the press is only loosely based on reality, it's not evidence I'd use to support anything. It proves they were involved in accidents. We all know the road holding of capri's wasn't the best, and yes the 2.8's were a lot better than the 3.0L, so I'd want to know a great deal more before I used that as an example of anything.

 

[Steve Smith]

when the local force were given 2.8 capris

Capris as police cars? They handle as if they have castors instead of back wheels at anything over 30!

but I've never had any training to drive other than in accordance with my various licenses

In theory, you shouldn't need any more training that that because if you have been taught properly, you can just improve on what you have been taught by gaining more practice at it.

Sadly though, the majority forget half of what they have learned as soon as they leave the driving test centre with a pass certificate and start introducing bad practices like holding the car at junctions and traffic lights on the foot brake and in gear and crossing their hands on the steering wheel. They seem to forget where the indicator lever is too!


Steve.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

Drivers learning today only learn how to pass the driving test and the route ! - you don't really learn how to drive until you actually have been driving a few months and experience a hard winter.

 

[viv1969]

So enlighten us Bernie, how would you rate your own driving?

 

[viv1969]

Drivers learning today only learn how to pass the driving test and the route ! - you don't really learn how to drive until you actually have been driving a few months and experience a hard winter.

Exactly this.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Capris as police cars? They handle as if they have castors instead of back wheels at anything over 30!



In theory, you shouldn't need any more training that that because if you have been taught properly, you can just improve on what you have been taught by gaining more practice at it.

Sadly though, the majority forget half of what they have learned as soon as they leave the driving test centre with a pass certificate and start introducing bad practices like holding the car at junctions and traffic lights on the foot brake and in gear and crossing their hands on the steering wheel. They seem to forget where the indicator lever is too!


Steve.

Agreed. In fact, I had very little training at all, a total of 6 hours before passing my car test (4 hours instruction + 1 hour before the test + 1 hour for the test), passed 1st time.
Motorbike test - no instruction at all. Passed 1st time.
HGV1 - got that on grandfather rights, was night trunking when at university, all that was needed back then was to be 21 years old and a car licence, no training at all, other than a quick demo of how the gearchange worked

Back then, we had to know far more about vehicles, but the driving tests were much easier.

Back in the 70's I sort of drove an emergency vehicle. I had set up as a photographer and was struggling, so I worked as a driver at night, we used to run blood and sometimes transplant kidneys around, blues and twos. I was driving a Mk 3 Cortina XL2000, which was pretty fast in its day.
In theory we were given a police escort but that usually either didn't happen or it was a panda car that could only do 70 going downhill with the wind behind it, so we just had to get on with it, my fastest ever was Essex to Kings College Hospital, right through the centre of London, 24 miles in 27 minutes - no training for that either...

Which is why I value training.

In that time I've had 3 accidents, the first wasn't my fault and the other driver was prosecuted.
In the second, I reversed over a short wheelbase rover in a truck - or at least it ended up as a short wheelbase rover
The third was a few weeks ago, I reversed into a car, due to carelessness.

 

[Cobra]

Capris as police cars? They handle as if they have castors instead of back wheels at anything over 30!
Steve.

Good fun weren't they?

The 2.8 injection special was a different beast altogether though.
It went like lard off a shovel,
and handled far better than the previous 3.0l. or the base 2.8i
the 7 x 13 with 205 x 60 helped as did the lower profile and the LSD

 

[big soft moose]

the 7 x 13 with 205 x 60 helped as did the lower profile and the LSD

halleucingenic drugs don't generally help driving performance do they ? (or was it that you wer so ripped to the tits you just thought the handling was great)

 

[Cobra]

halleucingenic drugs don't generally help driving performance do they ? (or was it that you wer so ripped to the tits you just thought the handling was great)

I used to add a few grammes to the tank once a weeeeeeek
and man did it flyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy