Driving test

dublinguy2004

I failed my driving test (attempt no. 4) there last week. This time I got out of my car feeling I definitely passed that one only to be told the unfortunate news in the all too familiar dreary tone.

The reason for failure: driving too close to parked cars. I thought this a bit harsh. Thing is I can't even remember driving close to any cars! There's no appeal and I'm left with a 14 month wait and about €500 expenses in lessons/applications/licence renewals plus having to take a day off work.

Ok I generally accept the system that exists but it is too complicated and needs to be streamlined. 14 months wait is ridiculous. No new driving testers have been recruited since 1997! The system as it is is hampering the economy because young people can't afford insurance, they won't buy cars and can't get around as freely as can be. Plus there are hundreds of thousands of provisional drivers (like me) cheerily bandying about the place. Why should I be made pay in such a disproportionate manner for these inefficiencies? All I want to do is drive my car at the end of the day.

Boggle

You got shafted mate. Sounds like an easy failure option to me.

limbovski

no offence but failing 4 times is a lot...

why cant you appeal???

also can you not get a letter from your employer saying you need the licence to work...

dublinguy2004

Well being a research student, I don't really have an 'employer'. I get money from a government agency who I don't think are my employers. I'm stuck at the back of the queue whilst others skip me which is rather annoying.

Anyone out there looking for a part-time employee? You might be able to fix me up with a snappy driving test in exchange for my labour?!

John R

dublinguy2004 wrote:

Anyone out there looking for a part-time employee? You might be able to fix me up with a snappy driving test in exchange for my labour?!

Employ a student and get him something that is of no benefit to anyone but himself? Sounds like a lose lose situation to me.

The big injustice that I can see is to the public. Someone who has failed a basic driving test 4 times is free to drive around unhindered.

http://www.drivingtest.ie/drivingtest/HTMLContent/frameset.html

Loughrea, Ennis or Roscommon I would suggest for try No.5.



I reckon there should be a limit of the amount of tests allowed, fail 10 and that is it. Provisional licence revoked and no new one, at least for a certain period.

We need to get away from this attitude that driving is a right everone has, it is by far the most dangerous thing we all do regularly and many people are incapable or unwilling to learn how to drive responsibly.
We are already going after those who chose to drive irresponsibly but in this country a person can drive for their whole life without demonstrating the basic ability to pass the test, just apply every couple of years and continue regardless on the provisional.

dublinguy2004

John R wrote:

Employ a student and get him something that is of no benefit to anyone but himself? Sounds like a lose lose situation to me.

Eh, the job bit was merely a humorous posting. And besides, what are you talking about when you harp on about "employing a student that is of no benefit to anyone but himself"? Surely if someone wanted me to work for him and required me to drive, then it would be a win-win situation?

John R wrote:

The big injustice that I can see is to the public. Someone who has failed a basic driving test 4 times is free to drive around unhindered.

http://www.drivingtest.ie/drivingtest/HTMLContent/frameset.html

Loughrea, Ennis or Roscommon I would suggest for try No.5.



I reckon there should be a limit of the amount of tests allowed, fail 10 and that is it. Provisional licence revoked and no new one, at least for a certain period.

We need to get away from this attitude that driving is a right everone has, it is by far the most dangerous thing we all do regularly and many people are incapable or unwilling to learn how to drive responsibly.
We are already going after those who chose to drive irresponsibly but in this country a person can drive for their whole life without demonstrating the basic ability to pass the test, just apply every couple of years and continue regardless on the provisional.

Yeah, you're right, I'm perfectly free to drive about my car. Only thing is it's a bit annoying trying to avoid motorways but there aren't many of those in Ireland so it's not too much of a problem. I would prefer to drive on the motorway when going to Galway now as they are a hell of a lot safer and the accident rate is much, much lower.

I wouldn't like to see anyone disqualified on the basis of number of test failures. If you can pass the test, you've satisfied the state that you are competent and that's all that matters at the end of the day (I've yet to satisfy these guys). One can sit the leaving cert as many times as they like; people are entitled to have a leaving certificate just as they are to have a driving licence and go about their business as they please.

I agree, the driving licencing system in Ireland is a sham. It needs a complete overhaul, but you do have to bear in mind that people have the right to travel and need to drive which must also be respected.

whippet

dublinguy2004 wrote:

Thing is I can't even remember driving close to any cars! .

that would sum it up really, if you can't recall driving too close to cars you probably were consistantly too close and by your driving style had no idea that what you were doing was incorrect.

Being the devils advocate here, I would imagine you are peeved at failing again and are venting a frustration by blaming 'the system' and the instructor.

You need 8 (i think) errors of a minor nature to fail, not just momentarily drifting a little too close to a parked car. This along with the fact that you already failed three times would lead me to believe that you are not of the adquate standard to hold a full license.

On the other note, It is shocking that someone who has shown on four seperate occasions that they are not of a high enough standard to hold a driver's license is allowed to drive on our roads.

dublinguy2004

whippet wrote:

that would sum it up really, if you can't recall driving too close to cars you probably were consistantly too close and by your driving style had no idea that what you were doing was incorrect.

Being the devils advocate here, I would imagine you are peeved at failing again and are venting a frustration by blaming 'the system' and the instructor.

You need 8 (i think) errors of a minor nature to fail, not just momentarily drifting a little too close to a parked car. This along with the fact that you already failed three times would lead me to believe that you are not of the adquate standard to hold a full license.

Oh so you're my guardian angel all of a sudden? I'm telling my story as I experienced it.

And I'm not on a 'blame the system' rant. I've been around boards.ie long enough to know about people who blame the 'government' or the 'authorities' when things don't work out for them. If you'll read in my previous posting, you'll find that I do generally accept that the driving test has to be passed; the crux of my gripe is really why one has to wait for so long. 14 months is a ridiculous wait for anyone.

whippet wrote:

On the other note, It is shocking that someone who has shown on four seperate occasions that they are not of a high enough standard to hold a driver's license is allowed to drive on our roads.

It's not really for you to decide whether I'm of 'high enough standard' or not. I've not had an accident in 6 years of safe driving since I was 18 which is a lot more than can be said for your average 'young male driver'. I've probably had more lessons and studied rules for more hours than 99% of the driving population.

Point is, I'm legally complient and that's all that matters to me. It's just a bugger having to go through all the rig-morole to get a full licence.

whippet

I'm telling my story as I experienced it

and I am giving my opinion based on the information I have.

And I'm not on a 'blame the system' rant

you quite clearly stated in your original post that you:

I thought this a bit harsh. Thing is I can't even remember driving close to any cars! There's no appeal

in my view, with long waits in between tests there should ample time to practice and ensure that you learn from your mistakes and pass the next time.

Personally I feel that there is major problems within the system, but it is the only system that we have to work with.

It's not really for you to decide whether I'm of 'high enough standard' or not

four individual testers have made that decision for me.

I've probably had more lessons and studied rules for more hours than 99% of the driving population.

that would lead me to believe that you should have passed with flying colours?

I've not had an accident in 6 years of safe driving since I was 18 which is a lot more than can be said for your average 'young male driver'

so by your figures 1 in 2 young male drivers crash before they turn 24?

I wouldn't be too sure of that.

jackofalltrades

I agree, the driving licencing system in Ireland is a sham. It
needs a complete overhaul, but you do have to bear in mind that people
have the right to travel and need to drive which must also be
respected.

So you're saying the testing system is a sham and it needs to be better,
but at the same time it has to be easy enough to pass, because people
"need" and are "entitled" to drive. This kind of attitude among a lot of
driver sout there is wah the roads are so unsafe at the moment. Driving is a
privelege not a right.

It's not really for you to decide whether I'm of 'high enough
standard' or not. I've not had an accident in 6 years of safe driving
since I was 18 which is a lot more than can be said for your average
'young male driver'. I've probably had more lessons and studied rules for
more hours than 99% of the driving population.

You're right it isn't up to Whippet to decide wether you're of "high
enough standard" or not, its up to the driving testers, who have failed
you 4 times so far. In some countries would have to go an see a
pyschologist after failing 4 times to see wether you should be allowed
drive at all.
Just because you haven't have an accident doesn't make you a safe driver.

Point is, I'm legally complient and that's all that matters to
me.

Are you legally compliant, id say in 6 years of driving on a
provisional licence you've driven without a fully licenced driver at least once.

Nuttzz

Look he failed, he has been honest enough to say it was his forth attempt. A driving test can be very stressful, probably much more stressful than normal day to day driving, and the feedback they give you if you fail is quite poor.

As for the reason he failed, driving to close to parked cars, if he didnt hit one he wasnt to close IMHO.

Lets be honest the sooner the whole system is reformed the better.

Andrew Duffy

You don't fail a test for a single fault unless that fault is highly dangerous. When you finish the test you are given a copy of the testers fault sheet, which will give you an idea of what you've been doing wrong. Also, if you;ve failed four times, I'd strongly advise changing your pre-test instructor, even if that means doing your next test in a different centre.

Andrew Duffy

Nuttzz wrote:

As for the reason he failed, driving to close to parked cars, if he didnt hit one he wasnt to close IMHO.

I don't think it's a failing fault, unless it was continuous, but in any case the problem is that stupid people get out of their cars without looking, and you can chop their legs off if you are too close. If you are too close you also slightly reduce your visibility of hazards (read, children) between parked cars.

In a driving test, you also have to run a fine line between driving too fast past a line of parked cars (in a busy town with narrow streets, 50 km/h is too fast) and being marked down for progress.

cormie

How did you fail the other 3 times? Was it the same errors? And did you get a pink for driving too close or 8 blues? What other blues did you get on all your tests? I scraped by yesterday with 7 blues, phew, I of course think the blue X's were a bit harsh as I don't think they were more serious faults. That is of course what I think.. these were my blues:

Observation:
Changing lane: XX
Turning Right: X

Signals:Beckoning Others: X (Lady with a buggy who was already on the road was about to stop for me but since she was already on the road I gave her a wave to let her know I was letting her go as she had the right of way):

Speed:
Road Conditions: X
Traffic Conditions: X
Turning Right: X

I'm quite annoyed I got any Blues to be honest but I'll be keeping an eye out for where I'm going wrong still.


Yes the system is in shambals and it's ridiculous we have to wait for so long, but you only have yourself to blame. If you were taught properly from the start you would have had a better chance of passing if you had adequate experience. Every time someone fails that's a waste of a test that could have been used for someone who would have passed. My friend has a full test due in August, he had 4 lessons about a year ago, that's 4 hours experience driving... a year ago!! That test time could be used for someone else who has a better chance.

Good luck anyway, best thing is just get out there and get as much experience as you can.

Look up Castle School of Motoring in the Golden Pages, I had 3 pre tests with Clifford, he was recommended by another poster who was recommended by a number of other people, now I'm recommending him to you. He will go over everything and will hopefully make you pass your next one.

cormie

Andrew Duffy wrote:

I don't think it's a failing fault, unless it was continuous.

From the form "4 of the same Grade 2 faults for the same aspect" is a failure.

elexes

i think you should sit the exam outside of dublin

get a friend to ask his employer for a letter for ya .

hell if u give me your details ill even send one off for ya

i got my test 4 weeks after sitting my previous

John R

dublinguy2004 if you stopped complaining long enough to click on the link in my previous post you might just see a way to get your next test in a few months rather than a year and a half.

causal

dublinguy2004 wrote:

I failed my driving test (attempt no. 4) there last week. This time I got out of my car feeling I definitely passed that one
<snip>
I thought this a bit harsh. Thing is I can't even remember driving close to any cars!

If your a postgrad then you're clever enough to realise the following are true:
1) Your expectations for passing the test don't match those of the 4 examiners.
2) You are most likely making systematic errors.
As was said - change your instructor. That rules him out of the systematic error equation; of course you still remain in the systematic error equation

Your displeaure at the long wait for a retest is understandable. But in a way it's premised on the notion that if you could sit your test sooner you'd pass it sooner. But that is only true if your driving is of a suitable standard in the first place.

It's also ironic that as a 4 time failer you're complaining about the wait. Approximately 50% of people fail and have to re-sit the test - therefore - about half of people sitting the test are repeats. So you can blame half your wait on the people who fail and have to come back a second time (we won't mention third, fourth, and fifth times )

better luck next time
causal

commited

It also makes me laugh that you can fail a test that deems you unsuitable to be in control of a car without accompanyment and then you drive away on your own.

Ireland is a joke.

drdre

failing 4 times is ALOT:D

just get a bike its better or even maybe a scooter.i think thats the best way forward

Hotblack Desiato

drdre wrote:

failing 4 times is ALOT:D just get a bike its better or even maybe a scooter.

Not a good idea. Riding a scooter or motorcycle safely is far more demanding than driving a car. You need to be keenly aware of everything in your environment, which is also the case on a bicycle. I wonder how many times in the four tests he was marked down for observation?

Also, I find it a bit worrying that someone can change lane without sufficient observation twice on test and still pass! That's not good news for us bikers...

cormie

I was marked twice for the lane changing. I think one was when I went to the right lane to go right, I had indicated, looked in my mirrors etc, but I think due to nerves, when I stopped at the lights, the indicator had gone off and it wasn't till I started moving I realised and put it back on. I'm not sure what the other was for but I am very aware of bikers/cyclists, I used to commute on a bicycle and I always have an eye on them, I'd hate to think I'm a danger to them:( It kinda pisses me off I got any X's at all to be honest.

Hotblack Desiato

Just wondering, did you swivel your head to check blind spots before moving across, or just rely on your mirrors alone?

cormie

I check blind spots yes, under test conditions that may have been different due to nerves and not thinking straight. I don't consider my test to be anywhere near the safest drive I've ever done even though I passed it. Being nervous of driving when you're driving is not good driving conditions. I'm not nervous when I'm not under test conditions and would consider it safer.

boardsee

Talk about the 3rd degree, Ninja. He passed didnt he. Have you a full bike license, i`d say a quarter of all bikers ahve a full license. Maybe even a fifth.

If we threw you into a car tomorrow, do you think you`d pass your car driving test?? Im sure we can forgive him for maybe not looking thouroughly under pressure, maybe the tester didnt see him look, he mightnt have made it obvious enough for the tester, and so was given an x. Huh?

Ri_Nollaig

cormie wrote:

I was marked twice for the lane changing. I think one was when I went to the right lane to go right, I had indicated, looked in my mirrors etc, but I think due to nerves, when I stopped at the lights, the indicator had gone off and it wasn't till I started moving I realised and put it back on.

thats a really common mistake and gets alot of people
i failed my first test too purely over nervous but got it second time round :rolleyes: as bad as this sounds i believe its mainly luck you could drive perfectly everyday and just make one stupid mistake and mess up your test ...or in this case 4 mess ups

causal

Ri_Nollaig wrote:

as bad as this sounds i believe its mainly luck you could drive perfectly everyday and just make one stupid mistake and mess up your test

That's very true. And to appreciate the horrible reality of your sentence - substitute the word 'life' in place of the word 'test' - now read your sentence again


causal

neilCC

The driving tests in this country are a joke.

Failing for passing parked cars too closely?
Do you know what distance you're supposed to put between yourself and a parked car? Do you carefully observe such obstacles and react appropriately?


I totally agree that the wait is apalling and insurance is a scam.

dublinguy2004 wrote:

people have the right to travel and need to drive which must also be respected

People may have a right to travel, but being licensed to drive a car is a privilage not a right.


I don't think that passing the test once out of X tries is any good - there are some people who really aren't fit to be behind the wheel of any vehicle.

I heard there is a country (Sweden maybe?) where if you fail your test 3 times you're sent to counselling to see if you're mentally fit to drive at all.


(I've got both a full Car and Motorcycle license)

Ri_Nollaig

causal wrote:

That's very true. And to appreciate the horrible reality of your sentence - substitute the word 'life' in place of the word 'test' - now read your sentence again


causal

my mistake i mean something light, a friend falled just leaving the test centre as he didnt indaicate (the road was a dead end going the other direction) now i know thats stupid as he should have anyway but failed over just that! now thats one stupid mistake (and not life treating)

also other things can effect your test such as other cars in the wrong if u dont react properly u can fail over their mistake!

causal

Ri_Nollaig wrote:

my mistake i mean something light,

I understood you meant something light
I was making the point that the same simple mistakes that cost you your test one day may cost your life the next day.

also other things can effect your test such as other cars in the wrong if u dont react properly u can fail over their mistake!

You won't fail your test for someone elses mistake - but you may fail your test for not reacting properly to what is happening around you. Failing to react to a hazard can cost your life.

I don't mean to be morbid - but the harsh reality is that driver error causes about 90% of road deaths

causal

Hotblack Desiato

boardsee wrote:

Talk about the 3rd degree, Ninja. He passed didnt he.

My apologies to Cormie if it appeared that way, but that wasn't my intention. Of course everyone makes mistakes especially when on test. The reason I asked was to get an idea of how picky the tester was

Have you a full bike license, i`d say a quarter of all bikers ahve a full license. Maybe even a fifth.

Hibernian claimed it was 70% provisionals, about 3 years ago.
Dunno whether that was just their own policyholders, but as official figures are thin on the ground, it probably was.
Loads of experienced full licence holders left Hibernian for Carole Nash when they came here. CN's proportion of full licence holders is probably more like 80%, it used to be 100% as they didn't take provisionals.
Not that it's really any of your business, but yes, I do hold a full bike licence.

If we threw you into a car tomorrow, do you think you`d pass your car driving test??

There are no guarantees, but I hold a full car licence and drive a car regularly, so I reckon I'd have as good a chance as anyone else here.

Im sure we can forgive him for maybe not looking thouroughly under pressure

Sure, and congratulations to Cormie for passing.
IMHO though the training/testing system in Ireland isn't emphasising observation enough (among many other things) and it needs to be improved. It's truly amazing how poor the observation skills of some road users are - though they may never have done a test at all, never mind passed it! What a crazy system.

cormie

Thanks:) Here's to safer roads and safer driving!

Niamhie

Can you explain the techinal checks that I will have to perform on my car( steering, tyres, ventilation). I'm taking my test next week & am I bit unsure.

Saruman

I passed my test first time when i was 19. No trick to it other than for the month before hand i put myself in a test mindset and drove exactly how the tester wants me to so when it came to the test i was driving normally for me but how he wanted.. Simple enough. Once done i was back to one hand driving etc etc.. which i think is safer than the 2 hand crap you are supposed to do. It simply takes too long to turn the wheel in an emergency and you might panic.

Anyway that aside the bit about young drivers im not sure about. Im sure i heard that Young male drivers are actually SAFER than older more mature drivers for the simple reason that with the exception of boy racers, they drive carefully scared out of their brains that if they are in an accident their insurance jumps from a mere 3000 to something line 10,000 and they cant afford it. Boy racers are a tiny minority.

murphaph

dublinguy2004 wrote:

Point is, I'm legally complient and that's all that matters to me.

Are you though? Do you drive accompanied at all times because you said you've been driving for 6 years, that would put you on your third provisional at least, unless you haven't been driving continuously for those six years?

On your original post-It didn't come across as a rant to me. I understand your frustrations at the ridiculous wait for a test. The 'system' is a joke that isn't funny.

Newfie Bullet

While some driver training, combined with lots of practice and a healthy dose of calm can get you pretty far, in the end the system itself puts your chances at 50/50 *at best*

By international and European standards our test is very subjective, open to interpretation by the tester. Now this is usually normal, given that people (testers are people I hear) are subjective by their very nature. But the Irish system tilts that in a very particular way. Since EU standards for driver testing were implemented only after significant prodding, they were done in a very half-assed manner.

The standards for evaluation are vague and while you will get a certain amount of of "blue" marks which can accumulate in a failure, the explanation you get for such a failure is almost like "story time". Its not so much the tester's fault - the standards and guidelines they have to work with are so poor that they are left to rely on their own experience, which was basically the structure of the old testing system as well. The 'new' system is basically the old system, with an attempt to dress it up and make it respectable.

There is a tendency in the testing centres to make things up as they go along. Let me give you an example from my own experience. For my first test just three years ago I booked, called ahead and made sure that everything was in order - after all I'd waited several months. I showed up in my own rented car for the occasion (I'd cleared this beforehand).

I have had a full Canadian license since I was 17, and can rent on it in any country, insurance and all. The tester would not proceed with the test as he believed I was not insured on the car!

I produced all the documents and insurance certs, and was informed that I could not take the test since I was not insured on the provisional (which I had) on that car. I argued that I was insured on a FULL, recognised license on the car, and could drive it anywhere I chose, with anyone along with me. He insisted that the only license that counted was the provisional and that the car would have to be insured on that - a catch 22, since a young foreign man with a provisional was not *ever* going to get insured in 2002 - Insurance companies would not quote me on any license, regardless of the law.

Long story slightly longer, the point is that when you get a notification of a driver's test now, you'll notice that it states that a rented car is not acceptable. That’s directly due to me.

So what’s the point?

Well when attempting to book or take your test: 1. Never volunteer information. If I'd kept my mouth shut, our surreal debate over insurance particulars would never have come up. 2: Realise that the system is profoundly ad-hoc. When told I would have to wait a year for another test I got into the habit of calling once a day to check for cancellations. The trick to this is to be *very* polite. Not brief, but polite. By conveying this story as a prelude to my request, I'd take ten minutes. Since I was polite and sincere, with no trace of anger, they couldn't very well get angry in return. After about two weeks of this, I was on a first name basis with a good few of the staff - one of them went around, quizzed the other staffers on cancellations for the day and came back to me and said "2 weeks from today okay?".

If the driver testing system were well staffed, efficient and in adherence to European standards, you wouldn't have to do any of this. But it isn't, and it's not, so you do.

Bottom line, be politely persistent. Enough people pushing hard enough for long enough will eventually result in change. We should be much angrier than we are at the state of things.

murphaph

Newfie Bullet wrote:

Bottom line, be politely persistent. Enough people pushing hard enough for long enough will eventually result in change. We should be much angrier than we are at the state of things.

Interesting post. You should have kept your trap shut and you would have been tested none-the-wiser to the tester. As for people being angry, well a lot of people (it's estimated at well over 200,000) simply drive without insurance. Such inconveniences as driving tests will not bother these sort of people. The system is being reshaped to resemble the UK Driver testing service. See here (1.3MB file there-not suitable for dialup). They're still using an antiquated VAX to host the driving test database.

Running Bing

murphaph wrote:

Are you though? Do you drive accompanied at all times because you said you've been driving for 6 years

some people seem to be confused by this. Once your on your second provisional (which you get after two years on your first prov.) you no longer have to be accompanied by a licensed driver.

murphaph

Babybing wrote:

some people seem to be confused by this. Once your on your second provisional (which you get after two years on your first prov.) you no longer have to be accompanied by a licensed driver.

You're the confused one. Your 3rd and all subsequent provo licences require you to be accompanied (except in category M, A1, A and W). Only your 2nd provo licence allows unaccompanied driving in category B only.

Edit: Here it is from the Department of Transport's Driving Licence FAQ;

Q. I have held four provisional category B licences. Do I need to be accompanied?

A. Yes, you must be accompanied by a qualified driver at all times. It is only on a second provisional in category B that you do not have to be accompanied. If you do not pass the driving test during the validity of your second provisional you revert to being accompanied on all subsequent provisional licences.

causal

Newfie Bullet wrote:

While some driver training, combined with lots of practice and a healthy dose of calm can get you pretty far, in the end the system itself puts your chances at 50/50 *at best*

That's not true.
The test is not designed to have a 50% pass rate / 50% fail rate.

The fact that typically 50% pass / 50% fail is down to the proper / improper preparation respectively of the people who present for the test; perhaps with a tiny bit of good luck / bad luck thrown in either way.

If you fail to prepare - your prepare to fail.

causal

is_that_so

I am one of the lucky ones who got through first time. While I agree that test is designed to have 50% failure rate, it's not an excuse to fall on, although I sympathise with people on their third or fourth attempts.

Anyway the driving test.

Before booking the test I decided I might need a pre-test course so I went to a Driving school and I had a two hour evaluation. On that basis he told me I needed 8 hours which turned out to be four 2 hour lesson on the grounds that 1 hour was just not enough. I also took a mock test with a "grumpy" instructor (who was really a sound guy) which helped get me into a test mode.

The first day of lessons the instructor said to me.

"I want you to forget anything you think you know about driving. The test is 25 minutes and you WILL NEVER drive that way again."
And that was it. I listened to everything he said. I drove the way he wanted me to. In the weeks before the test I was in the local industrial estate, manoeuvring, up the gears, down the gears, turning corners, reversing, 3 point turns. Practice, practice, practice.

In the last lesson he told me I would pass.

On the day in question I made a mistake inside two minutes. My attitude at that point was that I wasn't going to fail for the want of trying and I kept on going. And that was that . A certificate of competence.

I think people fail for different reasons, a lot of the time nerves play a big part but most of all I would say, it is the assumption that they can drive well and don't need anyone to tell them different, that causes the failure. There is a theory that you stand a better chance of passing in your first year of driving becasue you have not picked up any bad habits.
Either way it's only 25 minutes for a test you will never do again. Do what it takes. Figure out what's stopping you so that you end up in the right 50%

dublinguy2004

murphaph wrote:

Are you though? Do you drive accompanied at all times because you said you've been driving for 6 years, that would put you on your third provisional at least, unless you haven't been driving continuously for those six years?

On your original post-It didn't come across as a rant to me. I understand your frustrations at the ridiculous wait for a test. The 'system' is a joke that isn't funny.

I don't like what you are suggesting; keep such assumptions to yourself pal.

murphaph

dublinguy2004 wrote:

I don't like what you are suggesting; keep such assumptions to yourself pal.

Woah, easy tiger.

causal

causal wrote:

That's not true.
The test is not designed to have a 50% pass rate / 50% fail rate.

is_that_so wrote:

I am one of the lucky ones who got through first time. While I agree that test is designed to have 50% failure rate, it's not an excuse to fall on, although I sympathise with people on their third or fourth attempts.

Three points:
1) You weren't just lucky - you did lessons and followed your instructors advice. You prepared well and you passed - that's not luck - that's proper preparation.
2) I said "The test is not designed to have a 50% pass rate / 50% fail rate."
3) I don't sympathise with people on 3rd/4th attempt. Anyone can have bad a bad driving day - but 3 or 4 shows an underlying trend of bad driving imho. furthermore, they're clogging up the test centre and doubling the waiting time for everyone else.

causal

Newfie Bullet

causal wrote:

That's not true.
The test is not designed to have a 50% pass rate / 50% fail rate.

The fact that typically 50% pass / 50% fail is down to the proper / improper preparation respectively of the people who present for the test; perhaps with a tiny bit of good luck / bad luck thrown in either way.

If you fail to prepare - your prepare to fail.

causal

I wasn't meaning to suggest that failure is designed into the test (although thats worth a thread for the tinfoil hat crowd for certain )

I was meaning to suggest that the pass rate of 44.7% (Wicklow) to a high of 64.4% (Shannon) is so bad that it says something about the test and the process itself. Can you imagine the implications of 60% of all people (at most), being unfit to drive? How did any of us survive the trip home today?

Even with a hundred new testers, a bad system, however efficent, remains bad. Maybe we can take a few tips from the Germans, and then do our test round the Nuremberg ring, in BMW M5's...... yeah... thats the ticket.

causal

Newfie Bullet wrote:

I was meaning to suggest that the pass rate of 44.7% (Wicklow) to a high of 64.4% (Shannon) is so bad that it says something about the test and the process itself. Can you imagine the implications of 60% of all people (at most), being unfit to drive? How did any of us survive the trip home today?

Exactly right.
The test is crappy - no doubt - the real problem is the poor standard of driving.
The main solution to that is CBT (Compulsory Basic Training) for everyone.
Currently the Government have plans to introduce it for bikes - imho it must be introudced for all road users BEFORE they get on the road.
Also, compulsory retesting every 5 years.

The above may not be popular - but imho it is part of the solution (in addition to decent quality well maintained crap free roads) and the NCT.

causal

is_that_so

causal wrote:

Exactly right.
The test is crappy - no doubt - the real problem is the poor standard of driving.
The main solution to that is CBT (Compulsory Basic Training) for everyone.
Currently the Government have plans to introduce it for bikes - imho it must be introudced for all road users BEFORE they get on the road.
Also, compulsory retesting every 5 years.

The above may not be popular - but imho it is part of the solution (in addition to decent quality well maintained crap free roads) and the NCT.

causal

I agree with most of it but I am not sure about mandatory retesting, however I would be in favour of retesting of anyone who loses their licence. I also believe that no learner should be allowed out on the road without an instructor ( I was so bad ) until they have completed a course and passed their test. This opens up its own can of worms.

murphaph

causal wrote:

The main solution to that is CBT (Compulsory Basic Training) for everyone. Currently the Government have plans to introduce it for bikes

Any idea when?

causal

murphaph wrote:

Any idea when?

No, and neither do the Gov.
The Gov announced it in their usual reactive knee-jerk PR style - then it was left to civil servants (I presume) to try to actually implement.

It was quickly realised why all the bikers had laughed when they heard about the 'impending' CBT. There simply weren't anywhere near enough qualified bike instructors to handle all the people who would have to take CBT. afaik that is still the situation.

causal

causal

Saruman wrote:

Once done i was back to one hand driving etc etc.. which i think is safer than the 2 hand crap you are supposed to do. It simply takes too long to turn the wheel in an emergency and you might panic.

I don't see how having only one hand on the wheel will stop panic

I take it you're joking when you say that one hand steering is safer than two hands.
I'm reminded of the poseurs who drive their car with one arm stretched straight out in front of them and their hand on the wheel at the 12 o'clock position - it's seems they think they're flying through the air like Superman :rolleyes: usually the other arm is on their lap or holding the gearstick (in case an emergency gear change is required or maybe they like the soothing vibrations)
Idiots - if they're in an emergency they've very little control of the vehicle - and if the air bag deploys they'll get a broken arm too.

Check out this video* of a guy doing a lap of the Nurburgring - not surprisingly he has two hands on the wheel to deal with extreme ac/deceleration plus cornering and accompanying oversteer and understeer. These are also typical of the steering inputs required in an evasive manouevre for an emergency (and it was an emergency you cited as an example).

As for panic - only training will cure that.

causal

*large download 14MB

cormie

I always have two hands firmly on the the wheel going along the motorway at 120 in me oul betty of a Micra. The faster I'm going, the better grip I tend to have. In a 50 zone I would have my left arm on my lap (poseur) but my hand would still be holding the wheel at about 7 o clock, my right hand is always firmly on 2 o clock.