I haven’t read all the replies but we’ll done waaatts for sticking with it. Most students don’t follow through and are just one post wounders.
Sure there’s enough stuff to be getting on with but an LGV driver will shoulder most of the blame in a large proportion of incidents involving them and rightly so.
Why, well because we should drive at a higher level than your average motorist even dare I say advanced motorists.
Experience helps but by being able anticipate the actions of other motorists verging on the precognitive in a variety of familiar situations a lot of incidents can be avoided.
I.e. I’m driving down a A road and a roundabout is approaching which I want to turn right at. Due to road layout I can’t protect my nearside. That BMW that’s up me arse will still go for it up my inside and I anticipate this and prepare for it. I was aware what the car would do before he/she was because it’s a common occurrence.
So an LGV driver who’s licence is precious and easily revoked should be a star driver. The trouble is there’s many of us that are the classroom idiot.
Course the worst drivers in the world are those that think they are the best. Often realising we never stop learning to drive is the first step on the road to perfection.
Don’t forget to include a psychological discussion in your thesis.
The DVSA ( qualified Driving instructors) do not teach or make Motorway driving part of the curriculum in attaining to pass a car / motorbike licence to the Pass Test standard
Nor is it compulsory.
One can voluntarily take the Pass + (plus) - at ones own cost dare i say, once passed the initial Driving Test Standard.
.
So by that means , how do they teach people to adapt to different road types and spacial awareness at higher/lower/different traffic volume levels with varying degrees of speeds and educate them to act/adapt accordingly on fast roads ( dual carriageways -motorways).
.Currently they dont - its in the highway code - you get asked a question or two in the Test and your instructor may glance over it.
The expectancy is one goes out there and adapts to the environment.
Whilst i also appreciate that there are many parts of the UK that do not have a Motorway nearby nor access to one (Norfolk/Cornwall/Lincolnshire , etc for example).
Lincolnshire for example , has a high proportion of road traffic collisions, incidents & injury and fatal .
So just how do we go about educating drivers and modifying their attitudes to standards of driving to avoid these types of incidents
.
Until a person has passed their test (to the required Driving Test Standard ) and they then venture out and beyond and begin to travel further afield, they wont gain the differing experiences of life as we know it.
.
We also have way loads of people visiting and relocating to the UK from other Countries who may also have never driven / had access to /or experienced a conventional type road system of varying degrees (see what i did there ).
Edu-macation is a key part in learning , pass it on .
albion1971:
In an ideal world that would be great but in reality it could never work.
All drivers cannot remember what they are taught so how would car drivers be able to deal with all the extra lessons about trucks.
Learning to drive is expensive enough already.
Who is going to pay the extra costs?
It simply would never work in more ways than one.
As I said we as professional drivers should make allowances for bad car drivers. It’s part of the job.
Also if you want that for car drivers what are we going to do about all the bad lorry drivers?
What’s good for one is good for another.
It can be included as part of the questions on the theory test and it could part of the practical by asking the test’ee a serious of questions about how they would approach situations where large vehicles are involved. When you consider they are planning to put in a section about following a Sat-Nav unit, it wouldn’t be a stretch to include something like this.
Good post DD. It’s a pity more drivers don’t think like you. But only as far as driving is concerned of course.
Yes muckle of course I am for extra training because of the poor standards but I realise in reality it’s not possible.
99% of drivers think there driving is fine so why pay for extra training.
It will only get worse with attitudes these days.
EB you need to check your ideas because they are not right.
I spoke with a European driver the other day, who has relocated to the UK , residing and working full time as an LGV driver.
No this is not a racial post .
,
Whilst i was out with him,
He did something (a vehicle manoeuvre ) as a professional driver, (details of which i wont go into - suffice to say - it was wrong and illegal to do in the UK)>
When i asked him why had he done that , and what were his thoughts and reasons ?
His reply was (well spoken i add ) : " I have been here in the UK for 2 years and nobody has ever told me that was wrong to do " . Really i said .
.
Needless to say, i did explain and pointed out his error.
.
We can all think we`re the best driver on the planet, but you can bet something/someone will be waiting around the corner to prove you wrong
albion1971:
In an ideal world that would be great but in reality it could never work.
All drivers cannot remember what they are taught so how would car drivers be able to deal with all the extra lessons about trucks.
Learning to drive is expensive enough already.
Who is going to pay the extra costs?
It simply would never work in more ways than one.
As I said we as professional drivers should make allowances for bad car drivers. It’s part of the job.
Also if you want that for car drivers what are we going to do about all the bad lorry drivers?
What’s good for one is good for another.
It can be included as part of the questions on the theory test and it could part of the practical by asking the test’ee a serious of questions about how they would approach situations where large vehicles are involved. When you consider they are planning to put in a section about following a Sat-Nav unit, it wouldn’t be a stretch to include something like this.
The rest of your post is just hog wash.
The problem with adding loads of questions to a test or extra training it the time most take, for a novice driver is information overload. Which means the information just isn’t taken in or it gets confused.
To get it right really road safety training needs to be a continuous process and probably start before the person even takes to the wheel, maybe even at school.
And then continue throughout their time as a driver, which would force people to at least look at the highway code every few years.
We could also look at other parts of Europe for ideas, I remember reading they’ve changed the driver training in Austria, especially for young drivers and massively reduced the accident rate of young inexperienced drivers.
As for your problem with other drivers round you, and I understand your frustrations, I felt the same when I started driving trucks.
You need to read Dipper Daves post, (frustrations and Dipper Dave in the same post, )
You’ll see many drivers will do he same thing thing 90% of the time so you can avoid the situation long before it begins, and then instead of getting annoyed because you had to take sudden avoiding action, you can feel a bit smug because you were well ahead of the game, but don’t get too smug as that will lead to a fall.
albion1971:
In an ideal world that would be great but in reality it could never work.
All drivers cannot remember what they are taught so how would car drivers be able to deal with all the extra lessons about trucks.
Learning to drive is expensive enough already.
Who is going to pay the extra costs?
It simply would never work in more ways than one.
As I said we as professional drivers should make allowances for bad car drivers. It’s part of the job.
Also if you want that for car drivers what are we going to do about all the bad lorry drivers?
What’s good for one is good for another.
Do you really think a potential car driver could take all that in?
I can tell you since the introduction of the theory test candidates learn what they need to to pass and then most is forgotten by a big percentage.
Drivers do not grasp situations by theory alone.
They need the practical side as well and even then some cannot grasp what they are taught.
Other’s driving badly has always been a problem to LGV drivers but the professionals amongst us will deal with it.
albion1971:
In an ideal world that would be great but in reality it could never work.
All drivers cannot remember what they are taught so how would car drivers be able to deal with all the extra lessons about trucks.
Learning to drive is expensive enough already.
Who is going to pay the extra costs?
It simply would never work in more ways than one.
As I said we as professional drivers should make allowances for bad car drivers. It’s part of the job.
Also if you want that for car drivers what are we going to do about all the bad lorry drivers?
What’s good for one is good for another.
It can be included as part of the questions on the theory test and it could part of the practical by asking the test’ee a serious of questions about how they would approach situations where large vehicles are involved. When you consider they are planning to put in a section about following a Sat-Nav unit, it wouldn’t be a stretch to include something like this.
The rest of your post is just hog wash.
The problem with adding loads of questions to a test or extra training it the time most take, for a novice driver is information overload. Which means the information just isn’t taken in or it gets confused.
To get it right really road safety training needs to be a continuous process and probably start before the person even takes to the wheel, maybe even at school.
And then continue throughout their time as a driver, which would force people to at least look at the highway code every few years.
We could also look at other parts of Europe for ideas, I remember reading they’ve changed the driver training in Austria, especially for young drivers and massively reduced the accident rate of young inexperienced drivers.
As for your problem with other drivers round you, and I understand your frustrations, I felt the same when I started driving trucks.
You need to read Dipper Daves post, (frustrations and Dipper Dave in the same post, )
You’ll see many drivers will do he same thing thing 90% of the time so you can avoid the situation long before it begins, and then instead of getting annoyed because you had to take sudden avoiding action, you can feel a bit smug because you were well ahead of the game, but don’t get too smug as that will lead to a fall.
Ive just filled out the form, wish you good luck. As a question tho; are you trying to study causes of accidents, or trying to examine drivers attitudes to accidents?
Causes are most likely already objectively studied by the Dept of Transport. Your questionnaire is limited by being of a self selecting sample of respondents, and of course the replies must be measured against the true competence/confidence of respondents. Be interesting to find out if people involved in accidents give different answers than those who have a safer record? Some reference to the Dunning/Kruger effect here maybe?
Anyway if you are looking at attitudes you`ve opened a rich mine here!
Crazy World ■■ If youve a few spare hours I strongly recommend Dan Arielys book “Predictably Irrational”. The craziest part of this world is that within our own minds. And those who are sure theyre exempt are the craziest !! And while Im on my soapbox Ben Goldacres "Bad Science" should be compulsory reading for all. Loads more titles Id recommend, but those two certainly opened my eyes to the world of craziness between my ears. (I`m sure many would agree)
This leads us niceley into the emotional aspect of driving and delving deeper into the human psyche. The deeper the better so im told.
A prerequisite of the perfect driver will be one who can not only remove all emotion from driving but also be able to act differently from the norm in a variety of situations. Driving defensively is one way of avoiding incidents but this goes against the grain when coccooned in the illusion of a safe environment which by its very nature extends ones personal space. OMG theres a thesis in this paragraph alone.
Now ive never been to University so im winging it a bit here but I would expect a decent thesis to raise more questions and provoke more thought than it sets out to explain.
With that in mind perhaps considering driving as a snapshot of society in general is worth a look.
Lets face it we are evolving into a MBOT (must be on time) 24hour world where its all rush rush rush and when do we want it, we want it now race of species.
Couple that with social media and a sterile, disconnected way of life, due to the ability to do virtually everything online, oh the irony. Well everything except copulate but give it time and the option to reproduce virtually will present itself.
How does this equate to accidents, well im getting more and more ■■■■■■ as this post progresses (already had a sneaky tug as the wifes at work), but its all down to emotions and a disjointed society.
Incidents can be avoided by being diffused early, making a real life connection with another motorist be it a hand wave apology or simple indicator flash of sorry/thanks can turn a brewing roadrage issue into a non event.
Remember the road networks are congested with everybody fighting for their own personal space but the more that realise its an illusion of a battlefield and we are all on the same side the safer things will become. Make love not war etc.
Also waaatts why not contact some local LGV training schools, perhaps they might give you a go in a truck even if its just round the yard. Certsinley would be a good chapter in your thesis.
Must dash wifes back and ive forgot to wipe my tug evidence from the sink.
albion1971:
Do you really think a potential car driver could take all that in?
I can tell you since the introduction of the theory test candidates learn what they need to to pass and then most is forgotten by a big percentage.
Drivers do not grasp situations by theory alone.
They need the practical side as well and even then some cannot grasp what they are taught.
Other’s driving badly has always been a problem to LGV drivers but the professionals amongst us will deal with it.
I agree. What we really need is a second theory test, or something like an initial CPC, or a period of observed driving for car drivers, to be taken after they’ve been on the road for a bit, become comfortable, and are able to reflect. Like our periodic CPC, it needn’t be tested.
Also, am I the only one who thinks that drivers are, by and large, fairly competent in this country?
Rudeness and impatience seems increasingly common, perhaps a reflection of how driving is increasingly stressful and displeasurable. Complex (if not crazy) junctions and road layouts, can enable misjudgements (particularly for inexperienced drivers). The thought of minor accidents cause terror because bodywork is more costly, less durable, and the bigger whack to the innocent party will be from their insurers.
But I can’t think of the last time I saw downright, human-life-threatening incompetence - which nobody saw coming or had a chance to react to - and it is not common in this country.
Dave & Rjan are raising some good points. In another thread theres discussion about lower glass covered cabs for city tippers etc. Hopefully thatll be cure for the “high an mighty” attitude of some drivers. Bringing drivers literally down to the level of cyclists will maybe modify some bad attitudes out there. Oh and maybe do away with all crumple zones and driver safety features… thatll make some drive more carefully! On-going training and awareness courses have gotta be good. Obviously, being a perfect individual I wont be enroling, but all the rest of you would benefit.
Franglais:
Dave & Rjan are raising some good points. In another thread theres discussion about lower glass covered cabs for city tippers etc. Hopefully thatll be cure for the “high an mighty” attitude of some drivers. Bringing drivers literally down to the level of cyclists will maybe modify some bad attitudes out there. Oh and maybe do away with all crumple zones and driver safety features… thatll make some drive more carefully! On-going training and awareness courses have gotta be good. Obviously, being a perfect individual I wont be enroling, but all the rest of you would benefit.
What some road users see as bully-boy tactics is often just what is necessary to manoeuvre or make progress in a large vehicle (particularly amongst those who don’t understand its challenges). Swinging into oncoming traffic, obstructing filter lanes, stepping into a lane to clear it, or taking priority against the Highway Code, there are various times when it is necessary to govern other road user’s behaviour for reasons they may not understand or fully appreciate, and using tactics which they resent, but which are nevertheless essential to achieve a fair balance between my progress and theirs (and ultimately ensure the efficient progress of the traffic flow as a whole).
As for driver safety features (and safer road engineering), these ultimately save many more lives than they cost by reducing the consequences of bad behaviour. After all, very few drivers set out to drive as poorly as will still allow them to get away with their lives. A spike on the steering wheel would not make the roads safer - it would cause many more fatalities as drivers either skittle pedestrians to avoid sudden stops, or impale themselves under conditions which would have caused only a near miss or modest property damage.
With cyclists, I’m not sure what the solution is, or what changes they want motorists to make. Cyclists disregard traffic ordering, they disregard lane priority (i.e. overtake on the right), they often disregard lane discipline, they are inherently harder to see and yet don’t expect to have to take additional care (or resent having to do so). Their acceleration is also poor, their top speed low, and their safety features few. Even when cycle lanes are provided, they complain that motor vehicles aren’t there to crush and clear glass and rubbish. They’re really just a plain menace, most of all to themselves. Despite their self-righteousness about health and fitness, the risks are extreme, and the effort of cycling detracts from concentration and discourages the changes of speed necessary for polite road use. The bare minimum vehicle on a road should be a motorbike, with suitable tyres and suspension, able to achieve urban speeds.
Really i said .