Marked on progression *Anrgy face*

Ans Blix

I was going to submit this as a responce to a post, but i think i'll make my own thread to spread my rage a little further :mad:

I have a big issue with this big progression thing the testers mark on

For the last number of years the RSA haven't shutup about reducing speed and speeding kills "the faster the speed the bigger the mess" and "arrive alive" etc yet they mark on, what i would consider a safe driving (slow and steady wins the race), during a test

Let me first start with a quote from a website on the definition of speed limt
The maximum speed legally permitted on a given stretch of road.
As mentioned it is a MAX, not a minimum speed to use when it is safe to do so, but we all knew that.

So lets move onto some more interesting facts about speed. A direct quotation from the RSA's "Rules of the Road" handbook page 96.

Remember a 5km/h difference in your speed could be a difference between life and death for a vulnerable road user like a pedestrian

• Hit by a car at 60km/h 9 out of 10 pedestrian will be killed.
• Hit by a car at 50km/h 5 out of 10 pedestrian will be killed.
• Hit by a car at 30km/h 1 out of 10 pedestrian will be killed.

This proves that a lower speed will save lives, in my opinion a good bit of data a Learner driver is actively considering while driving (ie me)

Another benefit of travelling at a lower speed is the reduction of braking distances.

Now lets have a look at my practical test... a €75 disaster
While i think its would be perfectly fine (and my parents agree) on doing say.. 40 in a 50km/h zone (build up areas) or say 45 in a 60 zone (3/4 of the limit), both my driving instructer and tester are of the opinion that i'm breaking the rules of the road (obstruction and progression) , despite the above statistics proving that it is the safer option. (Score sheet had 3 for progression on the straight 2 green, 1 blue. In total i got 10 blues >.<)

To be blunt about it, to have someones head come through my windshield or have the fella driving behind me miss the sports highlight, I don't think i'd be alone in choosing the latter.

Also to put it into context, and to play with the proportion of it, i'd be breaking the same rule driving at 90km/h in a 120km/h motorway (3/4 of the limit) I don't think my little Feista could even touch 110km/h

Am i alone and missing something painfully obvious here?

**Timbuk2**

Although I see where your coming from, I think your logic is a bit flawed - and this is coming from someone who failed my first test due to lack of progress.

If you go significantly under the speed limit, when it is safe to do the speed limit, you become a moving hazard. Cars behind, who have experience enough to do the speed limit, will have to overtake you when it is safe if they want to make reasonable progress - remember that overtaking (apart from on a dual carraigeway) is probably the most dangerous manoeuvre that can be done.

Obviously speed limits are limits and not targets, but if it is safe to do the speed limit, you should do the speed limit. You have to use your head and decide what is safe and what isn't. Going 35km/hr past kids in an estate playing football could be far too fast, whereas going 80km/hr on a 100km/h could be too slow!

The driving test is a test of how competent you are at driving, testing your ability to control the car and make effective observations, even when driving at a reasonable speed (usually between 30km/hr and 80km/hr.) If you drive excessively slow, the tester cannot effectively test how you can balance vehicle control and observation at once.

I failed my first test on progress. I didn't normally drive too slow or doddle along by any means, but on my test I was being too careful because I assumed this is what the tester would wanted. I didn't keep up with traffic flow, I didn't take gaps in traffic that I would normally take, and I took an insanely long time checking blindspots and whatnot just so he'd see me doing it. I got 12 Grade 2 faults, every single one of them for progress. I took one more lesson, with a different instructor, who said my driving was perfect and for my next test I just needed to drive as I would normally drive if the tester wasn't there - and I passed my next test with 0 Grade 2 faults, only 4 weeks later.

MascotDec85

I can see where you are coming from but............. (don't shoot me)

Speed limits aren't just arbitrary figures someone decides upon. They are designated on a number of factors like;

• the surrounding area
• road design bends etc
• number/proximity of junctions
• accident blackspots/traffic calming
• interface with pedestrians
• etc etc

i.e. on Safety Factors decided by Risk Analysis

Therefore, if the conditions allow you should drive at a speed appropriate for the road. This is to keep traffic flowing as freely as possible.


I'll give you an example to show how quickly traffic stops moving. Take any motorway, call it the M50

Traffic is flowing freely in or around the speed limit. Someone cuts in in front of another car. That car brakes. What happens after that is a huge ripple effect. A car a few back isn't quite paying attention and sees brake lights. The driver brakes harder then the initial car and so on. Within something crazy like 1 mile the traffic grinds to a halt all because one person cut another up. Now I know that is quite an extreme case but the thought process behind traffic flow is the very same....keep traffic moving!!

Dublin City Council eg. control traffic signals and monitor them as far back as Navan, a way down to Bray etc etc.


Sorry but it's the way of the world, people don't like being delayed

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

macplaxton

Ans Blix wrote: »

Am i alone and missing something painfully obvious here?

As mentioned, you are missing the point a bit, the keyword being appropriate speed. Speed itself isn't bad, it's inappropriate speed as outlined below which can also be too slow, as well as too fast.

ROTR Section 8, P87:

"As a driver, you must always be aware of your speed and judge the appropriate speed for your vehicle, taking into account:

• driving conditions,
• other users of the road,
• current weather conditions,
• all possible hazards, and speed limits."

Ans Blix wrote: »

Also to put it into context, and to play with the proportion of it, i'd be breaking the same rule driving at 90km/h in a 120km/h motorway (3/4 of the limit)

ROTR Section 11, P120:

"On the motorway

• ...
• You must progress at a speed and in a way that avoids interference with other motorway traffic."

Ans Blix wrote: »

(Score sheet had 3 for progression on the straight 2 green, 1 blue. In total i got 10 blues >.<)

Having had a look at the scoring system, the 2 green, 1 blue for progress on the straight didn't in itself result in the fail. Only the 1 blue would count against you. What were the other nine blues for? Was there another 5 blues under the same heading or was it just having more than 8 overall?

Never mind what your parents agree with, the instructor and examiner are the ones that (I hope) would be the experts. Work with the instructor, concentrate on improving the weak areas as marked by the examiner and good luck with the next test.

PS The wife has a puny 954cc Peugeot 106, and if I thrash it, it'll do over 120km/h. I don't think a Fester could be any slower

ha-ya-said-what

Ans Blix wrote: »

Now lets have a look at my practical test... a €75 disaster
While i think its would be perfectly fine (and my parents agree) on doing say.. 40 in a 50km/h zone (build up areas) or say 45 in a 60 zone (3/4 of the limit)

Now that drives me mad when people drive below the speed limit like that & continue to do so & boast about what a safe driver they are & how they have never had an accident, they don't stop to think for one minute they could have caused one behind them from someone trying to get past them.

Experienced drivers get frustrated by that and as donegalfella said it encourages other people to take silly risks.

challengemaster

MascotDec85 wrote: »

Speed limits aren't just arbitrary figures someone decides upon. They are designated on a number of factors like;

• What the County Council pulls out of a hat at decision time

Fixed that for you....

:pac:


Speaking from experience - There really is nothing more annoying than going along at the speed limits, then having to slow down by 10-15 mph for some eejit infront, where there's no reason for going slow. Thinking you're being such a help to society by going slow and saving lives - you're actually being more of an annoyance and obstruction to everyone else on the roads.

Ans Blix

Ok, points taken (**Timbuk2**, MascotDec85 and donegalfella) But at the end of the day, the logic behind Limit is that its a max, not a recommended speed... I'll take your arguements onboard.

macplaxton wrote: »

Having had a look at the scoring system, the 2 green, 1 blue for progress on the straight didn't in itself result in the fail. Only the 1 blue would count against you. What were the other nine blues for? Was there another 5 blues under the same heading or was it just having more than 8 overall?


PS The wife has a puny 954cc Peugeot 106, and if I thrash it, it'll do over 120km/h. I don't think a Fester could be any slower

I got 3 on observation, 1 on signals, 2 on clutch :mad: and 1 on reverse, the other i forget.
lol this feista is falling apart, i'd probably start loosing parts if i got it over 100kph :P hahah

ha-ya-said-what wrote: »

Now that drives me mad when people drive below the speed limit like that & continue to do so & boast about what a safe driver they are & how they have never had an accident, they don't stop to think for one minute they could have caused one behind them from someone trying to get past them.

Experienced drivers get frustrated by that and as donegalfella said it encourages other people to take silly risks.

challengemaster wrote: »

Fixed that for you....

:pac:


Speaking from experience - There really is nothing more annoying than going along at the speed limits, then having to slow down by 10-15 kph for some eejit infront, where there's no reason for going slow. Thinking you're being such a help to society by going slow and saving lives - you're actually being more of an annoyance and obstruction to everyone else on the roads.

Fixed that for you challengemaster. But to address both ha-ya-said-what and challengemaster togeather for a moment.
You've just rounded up everything i think is wrong with the road driver at the moment. If you get mad at people driving a little slower than your used to, go see a shrink. Its better to drive slower than to fast imho. Love the "Experienced drivers get frustrated by that" bit, you were a learner once as well.

**Timbuk2**

If a car ahead is going very slow (for example, an elderly person) it means I have to slow right down, as do the cars behind me. This doesn't necessarily make it safer for me. As I am stuck behind you, my visibility can be slightly impaired as I don't have a clear view of the road ahead (the slower cars go, the closer they are together, technically). Of course this can be remedied by staying well back so I can see ahead of you as well, like what I would do if I was preparing to overtake a lorry (to make sure there are no cars directly ahead of the lorry).

However, as I am being slowed down by what is essentially a moving hazard going below the speed limit, I may get slightly annoyed and not be focused. E.g. I might be thinking "What sort of speed is this on a straight road" when I should be thinking "OK I should be staying back as this is an inexperienced driver and I don't want to appear intimidating and threatening". I am normally a patient driver, but all it takes is someone to come up behind you that is very impatient. They are distracted by having to go slow, and mightn't be as attentative to what is happening on the road ahead as they could be, and you might be distracted seeing a car driving closely and impatiently in your rear view mirror.

Most importantly, by going below the speed limit, you will often make it more dangerous for the cars behind as they will probably overtake you - a legal but dangerous manoeuvre. By going at the speed limit, most cars will not overtake you. Of course there are those who like to go faster, but that is their own choice and they are taking their own risk by overtaking.

However, in spite of my advice, don't go at the speed limit if you feel like you aren't in full control of the car. When I was starting to learn to drive, I remember being on the N52, which is the road from Dundalk - Ardee - Mullingar - it's a national road but it's quite windy. It had a speed limit of 100km/h but a lot of bends etc. and I didn't feel comfortable going 100km/h, so I stayed at around 80km/h. Cars start to bunch up behind you, and there aren't many oppurtunities to safely overtake on that road.

Now that I am more experienced, I can safely do 100km/h on that road. As my driving instructor once said, "being able to drive fast is knowing when to drive slow". I would now go 100km/h on the sections where it is safe (relatively straight, no junctions and I am able to stop in the distance that I can see to be clear). I would slow down coming up to bends and junctions, but would accelerate back up to the speed limit once the hazard has been cleared. This way I am not going at a dangerous speed and I am keeping up with traffic flow.

Max Power1

challengemaster wrote: »

Fixed that for you....

:pac:


Speaking from experience - There really is nothing more annoying than going along at the speed limits, then having to slow down by 10-15 mph for some eejit infront, where there's no reason for going slow. Thinking you're being such a help to society by going slow and saving lives - you're actually being more of an annoyance and obstruction to everyone else on the roads.

+1

What risk analysis reduces the speed limit by 20% when there happens to be a new toll road nearby;)

MascotDec85

Max Power1 wrote: »

+1

What risk analysis reduces the speed limit by 20% when there happens to be a new toll road nearby;)

This isn't the first time I've heard this, a couple of guys were talking about it in the pub last week cos the old N3 was reduced to 80km/h.

The reason for the speed reduction is that as there are less vehicles using the older roads that they don't have to cope with keeping the volume of traffic moving that they used to.

In addition to this they don't want the old roads having the higher end speed limit and being turned into a race track. Of course this can still happen but reducing the limit may have someone of that persuasion think twice about pushing the boundaries too far.

**Timbuk2**

In Dundalk, once the new motorway was opened joining Dundalk and Dunleer, the old N1 (bizzarely relabelled to R132) was reduced to 80km/h (it was 60mph beforehand) - as it's a big wide road that's mostly straight, there were complaints and the speed limit was eventually upped to 100km/h.

However, there is that annoyance of it being 100km/h but it suddenly drops to 50km/h going through a village (Castlebellingham). They should sequentially drop the speed limit - e.g 100 - 80 - 60 - 50 but instead you just round a corner to see a sign that says 50km/h - if you aren't familiar with the area it's a lot of speed to lose in such a short time - I once heard of garda cars checking speed just behind the 50km/h sign - a bit unfair, IMO, but I suppose they are not doing anything wrong.

challengemaster

Ans Blix wrote: »

Fixed that for you challengemaster. But to address both ha-ya-said-what and challengemaster togeather for a moment.
You've just rounded up everything i think is wrong with the road driver at the moment. If you get mad at people driving a little slower than your used to, go see a shrink. Its better to drive slower than to fast imho. Love the "Experienced drivers get frustrated by that" bit, you were a learner once as well.

You didn't really fix anything apart from making yourself look stupid. I said mph, because I meant mph. Some people can actually use both mph and kmph when talking about speed. Next time you attempt to be witty, do a better job.

And no, it's not better to go slower than to go at the speed limit. Think about it. It's why you failed your test. You're creating an obstruction to people actually doing the speed limit.

And yes, I was a learner once. That's why a few weeks ago, when I was behind a learner at a junction and he stalled no less than 6 times attempting to move off, I was patient and didn't beep. Other drivers might not have been so kind.

It's not just learners who drive slowly and cause hazards on the roads.

kasper

over twenty years ago i done my driving test i kept to the speed limit and i got done for lack of progress , second time round i purposely drove at five miles per hour over the speed limit and passed my test . it sure is a funny little country we live in

Ans Blix

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

If a car ahead is going very slow (for example, an elderly person) it means I have to slow right down, as do the cars behind me. This doesn't necessarily make it safer for me. As I am stuck behind you, my visibility can be slightly impaired as I don't have a clear view of the road ahead (the slower cars go, the closer they are together, technically). Of course this can be remedied by staying well back so I can see ahead of you as well, like what I would do if I was preparing to overtake a lorry (to make sure there are no cars directly ahead of the lorry).

However, as I am being slowed down by what is essentially a moving hazard going below the speed limit, I may get slightly annoyed and not be focused. E.g. I might be thinking "What sort of speed is this on a straight road" when I should be thinking "OK I should be staying back as this is an inexperienced driver and I don't want to appear intimidating and threatening". I am normally a patient driver, but all it takes is someone to come up behind you that is very impatient. They are distracted by having to go slow, and mightn't be as attentative to what is happening on the road ahead as they could be, and you might be distracted seeing a car driving closely and impatiently in your rear view mirror.

Most importantly, by going below the speed limit, you will often make it more dangerous for the cars behind as they will probably overtake you - a legal but dangerous manoeuvre. By going at the speed limit, most cars will not overtake you. Of course there are those who like to go faster, but that is their own choice and they are taking their own risk by overtaking.

However, in spite of my advice, don't go at the speed limit if you feel like you aren't in full control of the car. When I was starting to learn to drive, I remember being on the N52, which is the road from Dundalk - Ardee - Mullingar - it's a national road but it's quite windy. It had a speed limit of 100km/h but a lot of bends etc. and I didn't feel comfortable going 100km/h, so I stayed at around 80km/h. Cars start to bunch up behind you, and there aren't many oppurtunities to safely overtake on that road.

Now that I am more experienced, I can safely do 100km/h on that road. As my driving instructor once said, "being able to drive fast is knowing when to drive slow". I would now go 100km/h on the sections where it is safe (relatively straight, no junctions and I am able to stop in the distance that I can see to be clear). I would slow down coming up to bends and junctions, but would accelerate back up to the speed limit once the hazard has been cleared. This way I am not going at a dangerous speed and I am keeping up with traffic flow.

+1

challengemaster wrote: »

You didn't really fix anything apart from making yourself look stupid. I said mph, because I meant mph. Some people can actually use both mph and kmph when talking about speed. Next time you attempt to be witty, do a better job.

And no, it's not better to go slower than to go at the speed limit. Think about it. It's why you failed your test. You're creating an obstruction to people actually doing the speed limit.

And yes, I was a learner once. That's why a few weeks ago, when I was behind a learner at a junction and he stalled no less than 6 times attempting to move off, I was patient and didn't beep. Other drivers might not have been so kind.

It's not just learners who drive slowly and cause hazards on the roads.

Why would you, in a conversation about kph speeds, start talking about Mph? When you weigh yourself do you say "57kg and 9lbs"?

kasper wrote: »

over twenty years ago i done my driving test i kept to the speed limit and i got done for lack of progress , second time round i purposely drove at five miles per hour over the speed limit and passed my test . it sure is a funny little country we live in

+1, sometimes you just gotta laugh

challengemaster

Ans Blix wrote: »

Why would you, in a conversation about kph speeds, start talking about Mph? When you weigh yourself do you say "57kg and 9lbs"?

kmph and mph are really personal preference. I know all the signs are in km/h now, but I still use mph, and automatically think in mph rather than km/h.

It's a conversation about speed. kph/mph are ways of measuring it.

Not everyone has to do what YOU want to do.

kasper

and my car is more economical in miles per gallon

Ans Blix

challengemaster wrote: »

kmph and mph are really personal preference. I know all the signs are in km/h now, but I still use mph, and automatically think in mph rather than km/h.

It's a conversation about speed. kph/mph are ways of measuring it.

Not everyone has to do what YOU want to do.

Right so its fine for you to have a preferance... Everyone elses in wrong

challengemaster wrote: »

Thinking you're being such a help to society by going slow and saving lives - you're actually being more of an annoyance and obstruction to everyone else on the roads.

Well we see what your prerogative is, speed over lives :rolleyes:

I'm withdrawing from this debate, before it gets to sidetracked with petty namecalling.
Thank you all for your opinions

challengemaster

Ans Blix wrote: »

Well we see what your prerogative is, speed over lives :rolleyes:

No, by doing the proper speed you're actually being safer, not causing people to overtake in potentially dangerous situations. You're more inclined to put people at risk by going slow.

daveharnett

Ans Blix wrote: »

Well we see what your prerogative is, speed over lives :rolleyes:

That's utterly unfair imo.

Follow your argument to it's logical conclusion, and none of us would ever leave the house. In the real world, people need to make conscious, deliberate and calculated compromises between maximizing safety and getting things done.

TBH if you are actually as risk-averse as your position here suggests, then I don't think motoring is really for you.

macplaxton

Ans Blix wrote: »

I got 3 on observation, 1 on signals, 2 on clutch :mad: and 1 on reverse, the other i forget.

The way I see is you've got the hump about this progress thing. To me from the scores, it seems that you weren't exactly hanged for it and that there are the other areas that need practice - such as observation.

Focus on the areas marked on the sheet and good luck with the next test.