80 Kph Limit for provisional drivers

Boggle

http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=95699

Heard this on the radio today and couldn't believe my ears. What kind of idiot would suggest this as a method to improve safety on our roads??
Have they even thought it through or are they just picking suggestions from a hat?

In case someone thinks this is a great idea - here is why its not...
a) It would slow traffic on our primary roads and increase the amount of overtaking by qualified drivers - increase in possible acidents.
b) Drivers would just remove their L plates - especially in the case where the car is used by a licensed driver as they risk being stopped every 5 minutes.
c) Impossible to enforce - What would you do? Stop every car doing 90Kph and ask them for their licence? Get the cameras to look for L plates??

No wonder the roads are like they are....

Our man in Havana

Works ok up north. 45 mph limit (70 km/h) for L and R drivers.

babybundy

still a load of bullsh*t

fifth

Oh jaysus thats fairly bad.

layke

My initial thought on this is 'Feck em, i'm just not doing that'.

Stupid, stupid, stupid little man.

This won't work at all, and I can see people up your arse flashing and beeping the horn for you to move.

Is anyone here an idiot and not drive at 100km? Anyone?

alias no.9

Bond-007 wrote:

Works ok up north. 45 mph limit (70 km/h) for L and R drivers.

There's a much higher proportion of provisionals down here than L and R up there.

omega man

Good idea but could only work if there is a proper testing system in place to reduce the number of provisional drivers.

malcoolm

sorry, "R driver"? wot does it mean?

Wishbone Ash

malcoolm wrote:

sorry, "R driver"? wot does it mean?

Restricted

tom-thebox

hehe if this comes in I might have to trade in my c200 for a tractor! Then again why dont I go and sit the test, must get around to that

Supercell

All this would mean is L drivers removing their plates, its unworkable imho given the current ~1 year wait to even sit the driving test.

Sandwich

In theory its an excellent idea, and gives a good imrpovement in the safety margin for those still learning to drive.

Bu in Ireland - pointless. It wouldnt be enforced. Start by enforcing existing learner driver restrictino laws first rather (no L drivers unaccompanied, no L drivers on motorways). Then enforce the laws on those with full licences; speeding, dangerous driving etc.

... then consider improving the laws. UNtil then chaninging then, introducing new restriction is only window dressing to make the authorities and politicians pretend they are doing something about our road safety problem.

Wishbone Ash

Sandwich wrote:

no L drivers unaccompanied

Where applicable.

Sandwich

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Where applicable.

If we are serious about safe driving (and safe learning to drive) it should be always applicable.;)

Car Mad

layke wrote:

My initial thought on this is 'Feck em, i'm just not doing that'.

Stupid, stupid, stupid little man.

This won't work at all, and I can see people up your arse flashing and beeping the horn for you to move.

Is anyone here an idiot and not drive at 100km? Anyone?

iv seen plenty of idiots doing 45mph in a 60mph limit with his left indactor on for a hole 20 mins.he was like he was lost kept moving inside the hard shoulder at every major turn and puling back out in front of me.until i got so sick of him a blew the hooter flashed him droped a few gears and went flying past(safely of course:rolleyes: ).if people are lost pull in read a map.dont f**king drive dangerously on a main road.a bit if topic i know.and he didnt have L pates neither :eek: I cant see that coming in.its hard enough to get people to keep on the 60mph:D

Wishbone Ash

Sandwich wrote:

I we are serious about safe driving (and safe learning to drive) it should be always applicable.;)

Would you like to be the accompanied full licence holder in category M? :eek:

(or in A,A1 or W)

Tony Danza

Seems about as stupid as a bus not being allowed to use the outer lane on a 2-lane motorway. So they probably will bring it in.

I think a better idea to improve road safety might be to spend some money on making the roads better, but then again that doesn't bring in easy money in fines I guess.

Sandwich

Tony Danza wrote:

Seems about as stupid as a bus not being allowed to use the outer lane on a 2-lane motorway. So they probably will bring it in.

I think a better idea to improve road safety might be to spend some money on making the roads better, but then again that doesn't bring in easy money in fines I guess.

Nonesense. How many accidents are caused by the road? ("In other news, The N23 casued three accidents last month despite the best efforts of the drivers involved....."). Against how many are caused by people not being able (or choosing not) to drive in a manner apropriate to the the road?

Wishbone Ash

Tony Danza wrote:

I think a better idea to improve road safety might be to spend some money on making the roads better

AFAIK most accidents are caused by driver error, not road conditions.

Tony Danza

Wishbone Ash wrote:

AFAIK most accidents are caused by driver error, not road conditions.

Just a coincidence that they mainly happen on winding roads I guess.

Wishbone Ash

Tony Danza wrote:

Just a coincidence that they mainly happen on winding roads I guess.

Driver error on winding roads! Motorists should drive according to the conditions that they are presented with.

Tony Danza

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Driver error on winding roads! Motorists should drive according to the conditions that they are presented with.

But if the road wasn't so bad that wouldn't have happened, would you agree? I mean obviously every accident is caused by somebody doing something wrong, there wouldn't be an accident if everyone did everything right now would there. After being in America for the summer, they're just as bad drivers as Irish, I reckon, but serious crashes are few and far between. Seems like a good solution (but obviously very costly) to me.

Sandwich

Tony Danza wrote:

Just a coincidence that they mainly happen on winding roads I guess.

At 2 in the morning. On a Sunday. With no other cars involved. You must be right yeh.

Tony Danza

Whatever, guess I must be wrong. Sorry about getting off topic. Back on topic now, yeah stupid idea, just hold up everyone and pressurise the learner driver even more than when your first driving.

mloc123

can somebody copy and paste the article

White Van Man

mloc123 wrote:

can somebody copy and paste the article

Here ya go:

Report proposes 80km/h speed limit for provisional drivers

08:03 Thursday July 27th 2006


The Oireachtas enterprise committee is recommending that a speed limit of 80km/h be imposed on all motorists driving on a provisional licence.

The recommendation is contained in a new report from the committee which also proposes that black boxes be fitted in public transport vehicles and alcohol detectors in cars.

The report contains 30 recommendations that the committee says could reduce road deaths by 50 in six months.

The other proposals include refusing insurance cover to motorists who have not had professional driving lessons.

netwhizkid

It is not like it will make a difference considering the majority of Irish roads are unsafe to do 100Kph anyways and the majority of provisional licence driver drive cars that will only do 100Kph if you jam your foot to the floor, I am a provisional driver on my 2nd provisional from next week (if they send it out).

Once again it is another way for the government to nail the young "Ipod" generation - ("Insecure, Pressured, Overtaxed and Debt-ridden") generation to the cross once again. Such thrash as refusing insurance etc. We have amongst the very worst roads in Europe and the ones that are good are clogged with traffic. I drive within the speed limit but restricting speed limits to 50MPH (I hate KPH) is nothing short of ridiculous. The cost to young drivers is a terror not a mind this.

Sandwich

netwhizkid wrote:

Once again it is another way for the government to nail the young "Ipod" generation - ("Insecure, Pressured, Overtaxed and Debt-ridden") .

Sorry for the off topic - but really : Overtaxed???????????

You'd know they didnt work in the 80s. IPOD generation - you've never had it so good!

Ronan|Raven

Oh well, just passed my test today so dont care

Supercell

Ronan|Raven wrote:

Oh well, just passed my test today so dont care

Lol, well done, feels great doesn't it

NWK - Cant help but feel if you pass your driving test you may see the shoe on the other foot.

saobh_ie

Sandwich wrote:

If we are serious about safe driving (and safe learning to drive) it should be always applicable.;)

So tell me... what am I going to learn exactly by having a fully B licesnsed driver in the car with me? Hows' it going to make me any safer? If something goes terribly wrong all the passengers going to have time to do is scream "HOLY F***" before we flip upside down through a garden fence. Accompaniment just means that you have a passenger. There isn't actually any obligation for them to do anything is there?

Also are there any advantages to displaying L plates after about eight hours driving (by which time you should have complete mastery of the vechiles controls)?

Because as far as I can tell I make progress a lot safer and faster than the fully licensed people who would have to be in the car with me.

Actually... I am a fully licensed driver, can I accompany myself? hehe Where's the rules of the road. This could be good.

maidhc

saobh_ie wrote:

So tell me... what am I going to learn exactly by having a fully B licesnsed driver in the car with me? Hows' it going to make me any safer?

The idea is a driver with experience will see danger before an inexperienced driver. I know it happens when I am in the car with a relative who is learning to drive. It is often something small..e.g. "watch yer man he is going to pull out in front of you".

saobh_ie wrote:

Also are there any advantages to displaying L plates after about eight hours driving (by which time you should have complete mastery of the vechiles controls)?

See above. Driving requires more than knowing where the brake and indicators are. The L sign is a warning to other motorists that the driver is possibly (probably) inexperienced and incompetent.

dogz

its a stupid dangerous idea, it would cause more accidents than it would fix, consider these 2

1. nervous learners would feel more intimidated being flashed to move so that they can be overtaken, there is a continuious white line. Legally they cant speed up they will become more concerned and nervous with the intimidation and be more off a risk than if they could just go slightly faster.

And before anyone says anything like "if there nervous they wont be going fast anyway" theres a difference between being nervous and knowing what your capable of

2.Its ireland the test waiting time is a joke and none of these laws are enforced anyway (no-one i know been given a bolloking over not being accompnied, and im on my 1st provisional and have never been stopped once and i do display my L plates:o ) so what makes you think they will enforce this, even if they do i dont think many people will take much notice of it. I know for sure i wont be sticking to 80kmh when its safe to go faster

mloc123

Longfield wrote:

Lol, well done, feels great doesn't it

NWK - Cant help but feel if you pass your driving test you may see the shoe on the other foot.

I agree, a week ago I would have hated the idea of this but now I don't really care. Its amazing the difference that pink sheet makes

thebman

maidhc wrote:

The idea is a driver with experience will see danger before an inexperienced driver. I know it happens when I am in the car with a relative who is learning to drive. It is often something small..e.g. "watch yer man he is going to pull out in front of you".

Sounds more like backseat driving to me. Sure your not just a bad passenger which is also common to experienced drivers who are used to driving themselves about?

My brother looses it when he's a passenger when I drive slower than he does and have faster reaction times.

maidhc

brim4brim wrote:

Sounds more like backseat driving to me. Sure your not just a bad passenger which is also common to experienced drivers who are used to driving themselves about?

Nope.

Incidentally a learner driver went past me yesterday with the wheels locked up and went straight into a wall. She wasn't hurt, but now knows that it is harder to stop when there is a wet patch on the road.

want2play

The only way to improve safety in this case is to change the unbelievably stupid provisional license system in this country.

Ever explain it to someone forigen? they have a right laugh that we can apply by post for a license, make a call for insurance, ignore the competent driver as a passenger law because its not enforced. Simple

dogz

and they can then also laugh when they hear we have to wait a year to even sit a test.

really if it was maybe a 2month wait then yes maybe the accompniment rule could be enforced but a year how are u ment to get a years practice in

lessons? that would cost a fortune.
get somebody to go out on a regurlar basis with you, that would just be a major annoyance to them.

the only way we can get practice is to go out ourselves as much as possible, and also people never seem to give learners enough credit, theyre not stupid, they can spot their own bad habbits. I have only been driving 8 months and have so far done about 10,000 miles, i know i have some bad habits, which i would fail my test over, theyre not overly dangerous (holding the gearstick one handed steering etc...)but they would cause a fail none the less. I am aware of this and when i am eventually called for my test i will be consciousof them so wont do them, for me personally thats better than some1 sitting beside me screaming keep both hands on the wheel slow down blah blah blah

Stark

dogz wrote:

I am aware of this and when i am eventually called for my test i will be consciousof them so wont do them, for me personally thats better than some1 sitting beside me screaming keep both hands on the wheel slow down blah blah blah

Good habits start now

Have to book refresher lessons myself. Driving test is looming and god knows what I've picked up from driving on my own. Just need to find an instructor who won't fill my head with more crap. I only found out after failing my last test that half of what my previous instructor told me was bull****.

I think I might go with Temple Bar school of motoring, they seem good. I like the mythbusters page anyway, fills me with some bit of confidence.

dogz

yeah im going to get a few pretests aswell just incase they notice anything i havnt,

I agree with u on the instructor thing though, i got 10 lessons to start, the car was ****e full stop and i didnt really learn anything, i was being told to brake for corners rather then drop a gear, to just use my brakes at lights the list goes on:rolleyes:

Then half an hour in the car with my da and i had learned more than i did in the 10 lessons, and i just took if fromn there then

Supercell

Personally think a minimum for 10-20 lessons with a qualified instructor (that has to sit an advanced driving and instruction test every 5 -10 years) before you are allowed on the road accompnied or otherwise would be a good step forward.

I did get a lot of lessons before my first test - and frankly a lot of stuff that instructor told me as a load of bollíx and I failed my first test - couldn't understand why at the time either as I'd done everything my instructor had told me to .

Second test got lessons from the Donald in the Temple School of motoring on a recommendation of another board member here.
I then knew why I failed the first time, I was driving incorrectly, I passed easily the second time.

Bottom line we need qualified instructors giving CORRECT SAFE driving coaching to learners - and a prerequisite that a minimum standard of driving and minimum amount of lessons being reached before the instructor signs you off as being safe on the road.
With respect to anyone that says they had one lesson and were ready to drive 100% safely is talking out of their rear end imho.

Sandwich

saobh_ie wrote:

So tell me... what am I going to learn exactly by having a fully B licesnsed driver in the car with me? Hows' it going to make me any safer? If something goes terribly wrong all the passengers going to have time to do is scream "HOLY F***" before we flip upside down through a garden fence. Accompaniment just means that you have a passenger.

You're missing the point of the accompanied learner driver. The person with you is not a passenger - they are a teacher - teaching the learner to drive, so that after being tested and proving their competance, can have a driving licence. And then drive unaccompanied. The purpose of the provisional license is to enable you to legally take control of a car while you are taught - not to treat it as a full license, drive on it for years on end.

Your thinking shows how askew Ireland has become on this topic.

Sam Vimes

it could sort of be considered a good idea if the waiting list for a test was two weeks but with people waiting over a year its just stupid. no one would ever get where they were going if the entire country was stuck behind thousands of learner drivers doing half the speed limit

maidhc

Commander Vimes wrote:

it could sort of be considered a good idea if the waiting list for a test was two weeks but with people waiting over a year its just stupid. no one would ever get where they were going if the entire country was stuck behind thousands of learner drivers doing half the speed limit

Two weeks is not enough time to learn how to control a car properly. This is reflected in the latest road traffic legislation whereby the government has the means available to them to force L drivers to drive for a particular undetermined period before being allowed sit the test.

Same idea as the R plates in the north to some degree.

MrPudding

dogz wrote:

its a stupid dangerous idea, it would cause more accidents than it would fix, consider these 2

You seem quite certain of this. I presume you have proof? You should not have to look too far. Learner and newly passed drivers are restricted to 45 MPH in the North so you should be able to see evidence from there.

Unless of course you think there is something special about the drivers in the south that mean they will be more dangerous? If that is the case the problem is not with the speed restriction but the drivers, why don't you look at the cause and not the symptom.

MrP