NSW L plater speed limit lifted to 90kmh from July 1 2013

[Maka]

http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...2013-australia

Anyone see this yet? A good start i believe, any thoughts?

cheers, Maka

[rors]

A start - but certainly not the end, in my view.

The safest roads are those with consistent, unpredictable driving... Limiting some drivers to a lower speed (up to 20km/h below the posted limit) is unsafe.

I think it's counter-intuitive having the least experienced drivers unable to practise driving in normal conditions as part of the traffic flow.

[calmeister]

A step in the right direction possibly, but there are the complete novice learners, some, who honestly have no idea and then there are the more experienced learners who have attained a grasp of car control, traffic conditions and who do not feel uncomfortable in the drivers seat. Bearing in mind they are still learner drivers, I think an incremental approach in allowing them to drive at any posted speed limit would be more productive allround.

[flappist]

Actually I can see where the restrictions are both good and bad.

I have an idea for a possible solution to this dilemma.

Two levels of Learner's permit.

First level would be ab initio training and must be completed before continuing to the next.

The learner must sit for and pass several written exams including "Road Rules", "Basic Motor Vehicle maintenance and operation" and "Hazard perception"

The learner would then be assessed by a qualified instructor as to their incumbent skill level and RPLed as necessary.

The learner would then be trained in the various skill in motor vehicle operation by a qualified instructor until they are of a sufficient standard to be allowed to drive under the supervision of an ordinary licensed driver with more than 5 years experience. The test for this will be supervised by a senior instructor who is not the one who did the training.

From that point they are allowed to drive at any legal speed in any vehicle under supervision with the caveat that the supervising driver will accumulate the same points as the learner for any infringements.
If they attract any penalties they lose all hours accumulated and must sit the ab initio test and should they fail that go bact to the start.

After they have 50 hours ICUS they are elegible to sit for their Provisional license.
This will be another written test similar to the first with an added section on simple first aid and general safety in emergency situations such as flat tyre etc.
Then a practical test after which they are elegible to hold a Provisional license.

The nett results are there are no extremely unskilled learners under the supervision of a driver who has no idea how to teach or observe and correct potentially dangerous habits travelling a low speeds impeding traffic and creating dangerous situations any more as ALL learners would be capable of controlling a vehicle safely at 100km/h BEFORE they are allowed to mix with everyone else even though they are under supervision.

The system has provision for everyone. The country kid that has been driving since they were 8 will RPL almost immediately to "L" status.
The inner city kid whose parents while having held a license for 20 years have not actually driven a car for more than 10 will not be set loose in a "Dumb and Dumber" style rolling road hazard.
Those who have aptitude will get through quickly, those who need more training before they are at a safe level will be trained in the areas necessary.

Now this will not stop idiots racing or doing stupid things etc. on purpose but it WILL reduce the number of dangerous and/or stupid things done without the realisation as to just how dangerous or stupid it was.

It will help make the roads, particularly the aterials and urbans, a bit safer by lowering the level of unpredictable behavior during interactions.

[calmeister]

Yep, something along those lines flappist. A lot depends on the tuition provided by the licenced person in the passenger seat! Only recently I encountered a learner being accompanied by a licenced driver (aged 28) who was known to me and who has previously been disqualified 3 times for numerous offences. As it was all legit I walked away shaking my head wondering how well this kid is actually being taught to drive.

[FAT245]

When i went for my licence, i knew how bad all my family members were with driving.
I forked out the money and just paid for professional lessons, passed first go and have not been done or anything major.

I think all Drivers eventually pickup bad habits... it is human nature after all, and to pass these onto a young person trying to learn how to drive is a wrong thing.

[XRGhia]

Once they raise P-Plater speed limits by 10km/h in NSW aswell, then i'll be happy.....

[Sprint]

how useless, who speeds on L plates with a adult in the car?

The P plater is the one to watch for.

[noflac52]

This is a fair step in the right direction, as along with the 90km speed limit the learner will be able to get a credit of up to forty hours off the required 120hrs training if they undertake professional tuition.
If all new drivers are required to be trained by professionals it takes the 28yr old with three disqualifications out of the equation along with the dumb and dumber aspect.

All new drivers are trained to pretty much the same standard which will be a lot higher than it is atm.
A pretty simple solution really!

[Maka]

One bit i really like in Flappist's great post is sitting the "basic motor vehicle maintenance & operation" written exam, a lot of the youngsters would benefit from this for obvious reasons, three being -

1) knowing the impact of driving around in unserviced/unsafe cars in road traffic especially if they are driving & involved in a accident with a unsafe & defectable car,

2) teaching them mechanical sympathy & learning that keeping their cars serviced saves them money in the long run,

3) gives the kids a good understanding of how the car operates before actually getting into the car thus relieving pressure of having to learn both as they sit in the drivers seat for the first time. The less nervous the kids are out on the road, the safer it is for all road users out in traffic.

Imo this exam would be as useful as bumping up their speed limit & increasing the hours driven when taught by a pro. I think its good the minister is being proactive about road safety in NSW.

cheers, Maka

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by flappist

Actually I can see where the restrictions are both good and bad.

I have an idea for a possible solution to this dilemma.

Two levels of Learner's permit.

First level would be ab initio training and must be completed before continuing to the next.

The learner must sit for and pass several written exams including "Road Rules", "Basic Motor Vehicle maintenance and operation" and "Hazard perception"

The learner would then be assessed by a qualified instructor as to their incumbent skill level and RPLed as necessary.

The learner would then be trained in the various skill in motor vehicle operation by a qualified instructor until they are of a sufficient standard to be allowed to drive under the supervision of an ordinary licensed driver with more than 5 years experience. The test for this will be supervised by a senior instructor who is not the one who did the training.

From that point they are allowed to drive at any legal speed in any vehicle under supervision with the caveat that the supervising driver will accumulate the same points as the learner for any infringements.
If they attract any penalties they lose all hours accumulated and must sit the ab initio test and should they fail that go bact to the start.

After they have 50 hours ICUS they are elegible to sit for their Provisional license.
This will be another written test similar to the first with an added section on simple first aid and general safety in emergency situations such as flat tyre etc.
Then a practical test after which they are elegible to hold a Provisional license.

The nett results are there are no extremely unskilled learners under the supervision of a driver who has no idea how to teach or observe and correct potentially dangerous habits travelling a low speeds impeding traffic and creating dangerous situations any more as ALL learners would be capable of controlling a vehicle safely at 100km/h BEFORE they are allowed to mix with everyone else even though they are under supervision.

The system has provision for everyone. The country kid that has been driving since they were 8 will RPL almost immediately to "L" status.
The inner city kid whose parents while having held a license for 20 years have not actually driven a car for more than 10 will not be set loose in a "Dumb and Dumber" style rolling road hazard.
Those who have aptitude will get through quickly, those who need more training before they are at a safe level will be trained in the areas necessary.

Now this will not stop idiots racing or doing stupid things etc. on purpose but it WILL reduce the number of dangerous and/or stupid things done without the realisation as to just how dangerous or stupid it was.

It will help make the roads, particularly the aterials and urbans, a bit safer by lowering the level of unpredictable behavior during interactions.

This is a draconian solution similar to what the pollies are dishing out with the hoon laws. There are a million reasons why it would never happen!

[irish2]

Originally Posted by noflac52

This is a draconian solution similar to what the pollies are dishing out with the hoon laws. There are a million reasons why it would never happen!

Yes, but at least it will improve the standard of driver on the roads. The current draconian method of simply placing speed cameras everywhere does nothing of the sort.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by irish2

Yes, but at least it will improve the standard of driver on the roads. The current draconian method of simply placing speed cameras everywhere does nothing of the sort.

See my previous post. no 9

Same thing except that it is pro active rather than reactive and dishing out punishment for not making the grade.

Encouraging people to do the right thing is a better long tem solution rather than punishment every time.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by noflac52

This is a draconian solution similar to what the pollies are dishing out with the hoon laws. There are a million reasons why it would never happen!

It already exists and has done for over 60 years.

It is a paraphrase of the private pilot training syllabus a.k.a Pub 45.

[calais]

We are talking about driving a car, not a space shuttle launch.

Theres no need for draconian nanny state over regulation of what is a simple task.

Compulsory basic and advanced driving courses - get licence - police intervention with bad drivers - retraining.

Could be that simple couldnt it?

[EDManual]

seriously, the 110 zone freeways are the safest places to drive. 110 is fine for a learner. 50 in a 50 zone through a busy town though is not the safest place to drive.

Just gives the learners the idea that if they do the speed limit they are a safe driver...

[lockieoc]

It makes you slightly worried when you see people who have been driving for well over 10 even 20 years still no being able to grasp the concept of driving on a 110 motorway.

So many people don't understand just how quickly things happen as its easy to loose perspective when you are on a wide open road. I can see why these rules are in place. Walk before you can run

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

[flappist]

Originally Posted by calais

We are talking about driving a car, not a space shuttle launch.

Theres no need for draconian nanny state over regulation of what is a simple task.

Compulsory basic and advanced driving courses - get licence - police intervention with bad drivers - retraining.

Could be that simple couldnt it?

A simple task for some but extremely difficult for others. Police intervention with bad drivers only works if they are still alive and/or have not killed others with incompetence.

[calais]

Originally Posted by flappist

A simple task for some but extremely difficult for others. Police intervention with bad drivers only works if they are still alive and/or have not killed others with incompetence.

You went straight for the obvious soft spot in my suggestion. Police intervention.

Where in the simplest of terms, the need for police intervention would no doubt be significantly reduced owing the compulsory driver training required before being let loose on our roads? There is no doubt in my mind, that you will never completely eradicate all 'poor' drivers out there, and will always need the deterrent qualities policing delivers, to keep the worst at bay.

There are no two ways about it. You cant legislate against stupidity.

IMHO the more levels of regulation you attempt to apply as described in your aviation industry based example, the more expense which then gets added to the already heavily taxed 'privilege' of motoring. I believe there are simple solutions which when sensibly applied will achieve the same net result of better educated vehicle operators and safer environments in which to operate a vehicle.

[aussie muscle]

obviously, the roads minister got stuck behind a L driver...

[cs123]

If the government is going to "waste" money on anything I'd prefer it to be on diver training.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by noflac52

See my previous post. no 9

Same thing except that it is pro active rather than reactive and dishing out punishment for not making the grade.

Encouraging people to do the right thing is a better long tem solution rather than punishment every time.

Proactive: Do it before.
Reactive: Do it after.

Preparing drivers before they are allowed out on the road and not letting them out UNTIL they are of sufficient standard in PROACTIVE.

Just making them do a course and then letting them loose regardless of how bad they are and then using punitive measures to clean up the mess in REACTIVE.

You are contradicting yourself.

But to clarify:

A driver is timid and has very little confidence. They have extreme difficulty judging distance and speed.
This is demonstrated by minor bumps in car parks etc. and their reluctance to merge into traffic unless they can see nothing coming on either side of the road even if visibility is several kilometres thereby holding up sometimes large numbers of other drivers.
They slow down when merging on to freeways and stop at roundabouts.

None of these things are illegal and none would cause a fail in a license test.

Should a person of this level of skill be allowed to drive on the road as is or should they continue to be trained until they are capable of operating the vehicle and interact with other traffic in a safe and non obstructive manner.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by flappist

Proactive: Do it before.
Reactive: Do it after.

Preparing drivers before they are allowed out on the road and not letting them out UNTIL they are of sufficient standard in PROACTIVE.

Just making them do a course and then letting them loose regardless of how bad they are and then using punitive measures to clean up the mess in REACTIVE.

You are contradicting yourself.

But to clarify:

A driver is timid and has very little confidence. They have extreme difficulty judging distance and speed.
This is demonstrated by minor bumps in car parks etc. and their reluctance to merge into traffic unless they can see nothing coming on either side of the road even if visibility is several kilometres thereby holding up sometimes large numbers of other drivers.
They slow down when merging on to freeways and stop at roundabouts.

None of these things are illegal and none would cause a fail in a license test.

Should a person of this level of skill be allowed to drive on the road as is or should they continue to be trained until they are capable of operating the vehicle and interact with other traffic in a safe and non obstructive manner.

To address the first part the "english lesson" that I am not in need of.

PROACTIVE; to initiate something that may prevent a situation that is unwanted, from arising.
REACTIVE; to act after the fact to try to minimise the adverse effects of an unwanted situation.

See I can do it too!

I fail to see how you can use your imagination to deduce that I am contradicting myself.

My post no9 states "a fair step in the right direction" not the be all and end all.

Also I have continuity in my posts and if you cared to peruse any of my previous posts on the subject of driver training you will be able to understand my view on the subject.

I know you have read them before but you either don't remember them or choose to take simple statements like a fair step in the right direction as as an encyclopedia of someones point of view and total knowledge of a particular subject.

As to the idea that you had. " I had an idea for a possible solution to this dilemma" post no 4.

You are supposed to give credit for someones elses ideas where its due otherwise its plagarism.

Lucky for us readers you admitted as much in post 14 when you mentioned the real owners of the idea in an attempt to give "YOUR IDEA" some credence.

Unless you are over eighty years old I can't see how it is "YOUR IDEA"

I much prefer to debate the subject at hand on facts, discuss viewpoints and give credit where credit is due
rather than make it a personal arguement but you seem to have a habit of playing the person rather than the subject if someone is disagreeing with you.

I think its poor form.

You put out some interesting posts from time to time but I am afraid you have lost a degree of credibility on this one.

Back to the topic

Regardless of where the idea came from, some parts of which have merit, I still think its draconian when applied as a solution to the learner driver scheme.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by noflac52

To address the first part the "english lesson" that I am not in need of.

PROACTIVE; to initiate something that may prevent a situation that is unwanted, from arising.
REACTIVE; to act after the fact to try to minimise the adverse effects of an unwanted situation.

See I can do it too!

I fail to see how you can use your imagination to deduce that I am contradicting myself.

My post no9 states "a fair step in the right direction" not the be all and end all.

Also I have continuity in my posts and if you cared to peruse any of my previous posts on the subject of driver training you will be able to understand my view on the subject.

I know you have read them before but you either don't remember them or choose to take simple statements like a fair step in the right direction as as an encyclopedia of someones point of view and total knowledge of a particular subject.

As to the idea that you had. " I had an idea for a possible solution to this dilemma" post no 4.

You are supposed to give credit for someones elses ideas where its due otherwise its plagarism.

Lucky for us readers you admitted as much in post 14 when you mentioned the real owners of the idea in an attempt to give "YOUR IDEA" some credence.

Unless you are over eighty years old I can't see how it is "YOUR IDEA"

I much prefer to debate the subject at hand on facts, discuss viewpoints and give credit where credit is due
rather than make it a personal arguement but you seem to have a habit of playing the person rather than the subject if someone is disagreeing with you.

I think its poor form.

You put out some interesting posts from time to time but I am afraid you have lost a degree of credibility on this one.

Back to the topic

Regardless of where the idea came from, some parts of which have merit, I still think its draconian when applied as a solution to the learner driver scheme.

Well in that this is the forth or fifth time I have put forward this idea in the last 9 years and it is based on Pub 45 not an exact copy of it with a couple of words changed although anyone who has done aviation training or marine training or just about anything else training would recognise the construct I would not believe it is plagiarism anymore than "Avatar" plagiarises "Dances with Wolves".

One important point though. In future shoud you wish to make some backhanded semi personal sledge such as

To address the first part the "english lesson" that I am not in need of.

do not end the sentence with a preposition.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well in that this is the forth or fifth time I have put forward this idea in the last 9 years and it is based on Pub 45 not an exact copy of it with a couple of words changed although anyone who has done aviation training or marine training or just about anything else training would recognise the construct I would not believe it is plagiarism anymore than "Avatar" plagiarises "Dances with Wolves".

One important point though. In future shoud you wish to make some backhanded semi personal sledge such as
do not end the sentence with a preposition.

A backhanded semi personal sledge is telling someone that they are contradicting themselves on the tiniest shred of evidence and giving someone a condescending lesson on what you believe the meaning of a word to be instead of addressing the topic at hand.

Nothing backhanded about what I did! You were being condescending and I replied to that condescension in a straight forward manner.

I don't require your english lessons. Not even the latest one in which you tell me what to do!

My answer to that is that I can use the english language any way I choose. Its a free country.

On the Plaigarism thing we will have to agree to disagree!

If you wish to discuss the thread I'm quite happy to do so or do you want to keep filling it up with this. Your choice!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by noflac52

A backhanded semi personal sledge is telling someone that they are contradicting themselves on the tiniest shred of evidence and giving someone a condescending lesson on what you believe the meaning of a word to be instead of addressing the topic at hand.

Nothing backhanded about what I did! You were being condescending and I replied to that condescension in a straight forward manner.

I don't require your english lessons. Not even the latest one in which you tell me what to do!

My answer to that is that I can use the english language any way I choose. Its a free country.

On the Plaigarism thing we will have to agree to disagree!

If you wish to discuss the thread I'm quite happy to do so or do you want to keep filling it up with this. Your choice!

Well at least you did not accuse me of plagiarism.......

Though as you seem to disagree with my detailed scheme, why don't you elucidate yours?

[noflac52]

I don't have a detailed scheme as such but my thoughts on the subject amount to professional tuition for all new drivers.

Not mum or dad or the mate down the road. The bad habits and lack of education in many cases are passed on and contribute to varying standards of drivers who are only semi competent.

The standard that I feel we should aspire to in todays Australia should be a professional one and should encompass what we call advanced driving from well trained instructors. Working to an established national standard.

Advanced driving as we refer to it is not actually advanced driving! It is a high level of competency that should be attained by all before driving on public roads.

It would virtually eliminate the timid, incompetent drivers that we deal with on a daily basis. It may take some people a lot longer to achieve these levels of competence but instead of having to go back to square one for failure, credit is given for the level of achievement attained allowing more intensive training for those who require it in the areas where they are weak.

It will cost to get a licence, some more than others, but once gained the licence will be valuable to the recipient and they will be more inclined to act in a manner to keep it lessening the stance the pollies have for waving the big stick. We may get more equitable road rules as a result, in time.

You mention levels of training for various agencies. The aim of the training is to train, train and train until it becomes second nature thereby allowing the brain to to be alert to any differences or nuances that may arise in the course of duty and be able to take appropriate correct action quickly. A very valuable asset for a driver.

These are only my ideas but they do come from a lot of personal training and education in this field. I don't think that they are an overnight solution but I doubt one exists.

I feel that they will go some way to improving our present situation on the nations roads.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by noflac52

I don't have a detailed scheme as such but my thoughts on the subject amount to professional tuition for all new drivers.

Not mum or dad or the mate down the road. The bad habits and lack of education in many cases are passed on and contribute to varying standards of drivers who are only semi competent.

The standard that I feel we should aspire to in todays Australia should be a professional one and should encompass what we call advanced driving from well trained instructors. Working to an established national standard.

Advanced driving as we refer to it is not actually advanced driving! It is a high level of competency that should be attained by all before driving on public roads.

It would virtually eliminate the timid, incompetent drivers that we deal with on a daily basis. It may take some people a lot longer to achieve these levels of competence but instead of having to go back to square one for failure, credit is given for the level of achievement attained allowing more intensive training for those who require it in the areas where they are weak.

It will cost to get a licence, some more than others, but once gained the licence will be valuable to the recipient and they will be more inclined to act in a manner to keep it lessening the stance the pollies have for waving the big stick. We may get more equitable road rules as a result, in time.

You mention levels of training for various agencies. The aim of the training is to train, train and train until it becomes second nature thereby allowing the brain to to be alert to any differences or nuances that may arise in the course of duty and be able to take appropriate correct action quickly. A very valuable asset for a driver.

These are only my ideas but they do come from a lot of personal training and education in this field. I don't think that they are an overnight solution but I doubt one exists.

I feel that they will go some way to improving our present situation on the nations roads.

That is almost exactly what I wrote in my original post except I detailed the theory as well as the practical.

[noflac52]

Yes that is correct. I had no issue with the training side of things just the punishments involved for people who dont make the grade. Thats what I consider to be draconian and that is the type of thing that govts dish out to us all the time.

The difference is that instead of fear of failure the applicant is encouraged to do better and given every opportunity to try harder. If you are good at half of the subjects you get credited with them, you don't have them taken off you once you have attained a pass in them. For those keen to get a licence it will act as an incentive to try harder to get the rest and the harder the licence is for them to get, the more incentive they have to hang on to it.

The ones with no aptitude for driving will eventually drop out and go on to something else.

The ones that are able to pass without a lot of trouble will be higher skilled drivers anyway because that is where their abilities already lie.

I also think that these ideas have a million reasons why they won't ever be introduced. The same as what I said about your scheme.

The difference is, that I don't consider this to be draconian.