[smudger]

When I was younger I used to be a "cut and thrust get there quick" type of driver. Until one day when I saw a car I had overtaken earlier, pull up at the lights about 10 seconds after I got there.
These days I drive in more relaxed mode, and don't get to heated up if I get "cut up" and I am more aware of my "get out trouble" space.
So I think we all tend to change our driving style as we get older, but by no way do we get less aware of what's going on around us;)
Cheers, Smudger.

[wagolynn]

This thread made me think a bit; since it was first posted, I have paid attention to who is driving around me.

Low and behold, the better drivers have overall had gray hair or other indicators of age.

The ones taking big risks turnout to be youngsters slightly more male than female but the greatest gamble I saw was by a female.
The oblivious were in the majority. Defined as; pulling out at junctions into traffic seemingly unaware of others evasive action,
passing parked vehicles without slowing or moving out,
window shopping,
not correctly positioned on the road,
not using indicators when it would have helped all around,
not knowing who had priority at mini roundabouts,
smoking and driving these were mostly female. This body of motorists in the main were not old.
The next class were the bad tempered horns.
The victims were in general,
refusing to drive on the bumper of the car in front,
not racing pedestrians on crossings,
waiting for green or stopping on amber,
being sensibly courteous,
none of the horn players appeared to be elderly.
The worst and most thoughtless behaviour I found at school run times around schools,
in the form of silly parking,
driving close to parked cars,
opening doors without looking,
shouting to children across the road,
turning the car around with children milling about,
double parking,
driving off without making any checks. These were male and female mostly of breeding age.

I do not claim this was a scientific survey, but it passed time on several trips across town.
It is not my normal driving practice to bother with other driver’s behaviour in this way, I would adjust to what is going on and concentrate on driving my car, but it was quite surprising.

I think the issue is reasonably under control, police can stop and advise or enforce and or family members can and do intervene for the cases were people should not be driving.

As to reaction time for those that are interested try this website. www.mathsisfun.com/games/reaction-time.html

Indecently Stirling Moss says the press misinterpreted what he said.

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by wagolynn

Indecently Stirling Moss says the press misinterpreted what he said.

A slip of the pen? Surely not Sterling Moss being indecent? :D:D:D

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by Snowball

A slip of the pen? Surely not Sterling Moss being indecent? :D:D:D

Oh dear Incidentally, I suppose we will have to wait for the final Biographies to be sure. Though perhaps the Sun might know?:o

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by Snowball

A slip of the pen? Surely not Sterling Moss being indecent? :D:D:D

On second thoughts, perhaps it was indecent of him to make the remark, without ensuring the press reported him correctly...:(

[stuartex]

re test

well what ever the powers that be decide on any re test in the name of safety would be just another money making scam for extorting money from us , like the new cpc for us wagon drivers as if twenty years experience isnt enough ! its all about ways of getting money off ya , and i dont think harsher measures should be taken , i personally dont see any harm on an empty streach of motorway at 3 am and doin 80-90 in todays cars afterall they are built far better and for this

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by stuartex

well what ever the powers that be decide on any re test in the name of safety would be just another money making scam for extorting money from us , like the new cpc for us wagon drivers as if twenty years experience isnt enough ! its all about ways of getting money off ya , and i dont think harsher measures should be taken , i personally dont see any harm on an empty streach of motorway at 3 am and doin 80-90 in todays cars afterall they are built far better and for this

I agree with you about the money-making scam.

However, I cannot agree with your last comment.
In the first place, motorways should be built for higher speeds but, in reality, we all know that the road surfaces are not kept up to standards.

Secondly, it is quite obvious that too many drivers do not adjust to motorway speeds. At the higher speeds, they drive too close behind vehicles in front, do not look far enough ahead, and leave their own signalling too late.

All drivers who use the motorways are not daily users, and the network has to be cater for the less able ones; because it is a fact of life that in driving, as in any other skill, people vary in their abilities. This is not to say that those at the lower end of the skill range are unsafe drivers, but it would be naive to apply the "one fits all" mentality.

There is then the age/reliability variation in cars. "Today's cars" may be in the majority, but there are hundreds of thousands of cars which do not fall into the "built for this" category, and all are not religiously maintained to high standards.

And one final reason why motorway limits cannot be raised. It is habitual for most drivers to exceed all the speed limits at any time of the day; even the 30 mph ones. If drivers cannot be trusted to observe mandatory speed limits, then they certainly cannot be trusted to observe commonsense.

Also, you should see the harm in exceeding motorway speed limits, even at 3:00 am; because it is still breaking the law, and a good driver does not deliberately break the law. Perhaps the cpc instigators would see this factor as just one reason for introducing the legislation.

And if drivers do continue to ignore the limits then, as congestion increases, I predict that speed limits will be further reduced at some future date.

[stuartex]

yeah , thanks for the school lesson but i was refering to an empty motorway , i agree with most of what your saying but this cotton wool wrapping carry on is beyond belief ! some one cant do it so no one can do it it **** for everyone else , i agree totally with the driving to close as i deal with that everyday i make my safe distance and some clown (or two) take up my space , how ever i stick to my earlier statement as i see no harm "on an empty motorway at 3am (eg) ) and you have a decent car so does this allow the powers that be to take the case on individual merits ha ha

[Snowball]

Trouble is, if the authorities allowed UK motorway speed limits to be raised to (say 100 mph), there would still be the hard cases who would go faster. So in setting a speed limit, I believe they lay down limitations based on what speeds drivers are likely to exceed above the mandatory limit. The authorities know that they cannot police the whole motorway network 100% of the time, so they have to decide on a notional figure for an excess that in general will not produce problems.

You won't find this sort of explanation written anywhere, but the authorities are not stupid, whatever you may think to the contrary. If I were in their position, that is exactly what I would do in setting the limits.

Also, the limits must be subjected to average car performance. This average car consideration isn't based on my own personal opinion. My vehicle happens to be an "09" plate and I have a manufacturer's 4-year full maintenance and service plan in place.

But I see the extra reliability of the vehicle as being an increase in the safety factor for the benefit of my passengers and myself; not to be squandered by pushing the limits further.

Even a new car can have a sudden failure, and punctures do not consider car/tyre age and condition. At 3:00 am, and with no other vehicles around, the difference between 70 mph and 90 mph can make all the difference between coming to a safe standstill or a seriously injurious end to a journey.

[stuartex]

again (thanks for the school lesson !) and for pointing out the obvious , but i dont think your getting the point i was making , and mabey it was my fault so here goes again , i dont want to raise the limit , i am just talking about me say nipping up the road in my 08 range rover at 3 am empty road and thinking al be home in two mins ( at 85) disregauding any puntures , breakdowns etc as the majority of my cars actually go year in year out without these things happening , so i was goin off my experience and am sorry i veered off the thread now , but it is a comfort to know that there are some well informed and totally fault free drivers on the road , al have to settle with my international licence of twenty years over 5 million accident free miles but hey guess what i still make little faults albeit small , lol

[SRB09]

old drivers are just awful i had a lady of 72 pull out into the side of my car at a crossing didnt look left or right and somehow it was my fault

why oldies get cheaper insurance i will never know they are just as dangerous in a straight line

cmon dorris its a 60 not a 30 zone

[SRB09]

Jonathan was killed in March 2002 when his car was hit by a 69-year-old travelling the wrong way down the M4.


says it all

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by SRB09

old drivers are just awful i had a lady of 72 pull out into the side of my car at a crossing didnt look left or right and somehow it was my fault

why oldies get cheaper insurance i will never know they are just as dangerous in a straight line

cmon dorris its a 60 not a 30 zone

This is blatant nonsense. There are bad drivers of all ages.
And if you really want to know why "oldies" get cheaper insurance, just ask the insurance companies. They base their facts on true, actuarial figures, are in a competitive market, and cannot afford to get it wrong.

The UK population is ageing which, by definition, means that more older drivers are using the roads. Yet the rising accident rates are in the younger driver category; that must tell you something!
Has anyone bothered to establish the percentage of of older drivers who are financing the speed cameras? I'll bet the results would tell a story of their own.

Don't try to hammer the older drivers because, on balance, they are showing better driving standards; get back to following the training you received during tuition, and match those standards.
Harsh truths cannot hide proven facts.

Regards, Snowball.

[SRB09]

Originally Posted by Snowball

This is blatant nonsense.

Has anyone bothered to establish the percentage of of older drivers who are financing the speed cameras? I'll bet the results would tell a story of their own.

old people financing speed cameras??

surely we all are out of our ott taxes

and you cant surely tell me that the old dears and dudes who crawl along at 35 in national speed limit areas are in anyway safe or the 3 today that pulled straight out in front of me on the motorway without looking

old people have a bad rep and i dare say there is no smoke without fire

im not denying the fact that there are bad drivers of all ages that is fact but that is usually due to arrogant driving habits and the occasional mindless driving some people are just not good drivers

but with the older generations the trend seems to be that a majority in my personal experience are just not able to keep up be it reactions or changing road language

[smudger]

Originally Posted by SRB09

old drivers are just awful i had a lady of 72 pull out into the side of my car at a crossing didnt look left or right and somehow it was my fault

why oldies get cheaper insurance i will never know they are just as dangerous in a straight line

cmon dorris its a 60 not a 30 zone

Like Snowball says, bad drivers come from all ages. For example earlier today I was on a roundabout and had to break suddenly, as a young male driver, didn't want to give way to traffic from the right.
Luckily for me, the driver behind me was on the job, as he managed to stop without rear ending my car. He was an "oldie" as well, about the same age as me, at 58;)
Cheers, Smudger.

[SRB09]

58 isnt really old to be fair though im refering more toward the late 60s and 70s 80s bracket

i think you still have at least another year in you ;)

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by SRB09

old people financing speed cameras??

surely we all are out of our ott taxes

and you cant surely tell me that (1) the old dears and dudes who crawl along at 35 in national speed limit areas are in anyway safe or the 3 today that pulled straight out in front of me on the motorway without looking

(2) old people have a bad rep and i dare say there is no smoke without fire

im not denying the fact that there are bad drivers of all ages that is fact but that is usually due to arrogant driving habits and the occasional mindless driving some people are just not good drivers

(3) but with the older generations the trend seems to be that a majority in my personal experience are just not able to keep up be it reactions or changing road language

This is total, muck-stirring nonsense.
(1) I don't deny it happens. But have you bothered to establish percentages?

(2) Where do you get your facts from? The actuarial figures from insurers do not support you claims; a much more reliable source than that of a biased poster.

(3) Yet another unsupported and blinkered opinion.

On another thread (Help!!!), you have admitted to a 49 day ban; tut-tut, pot and kettle scenario to my mind.

This is not an impartial discussion; it is an attempt to use this forum to lash out with wild accusations at a particular section of drivers.

You will have guessed from my reaction that I am one of the older drivers. Yes, well into my 70's. I am a caravanner, and last year I pulled our van all over France for seven weeks. And we are planning to do the same again next year. I'm not unique. We meet many similar couples, some a lot older than me. A few years ago we met a fellow in Devon. His outfit was a Ford Focus and an Elddis Wisp caravan.
The previous year, for his 90th birthday, he took his outfit (and girl friend) to Spain.
Well done Frank, hope you are still going strong.

I will admit to 3 points four years ago; in a strange area and doing 40 in a 30 mph zone. (That shouldn't be right - oldies can't drive that fast, can they?)
My one and only offence in over 55 years of driving, and the first time I had ever been required to even produce my licence.

Subject to safe conditions, I tend to drive at the maximum permitted speed. Generally, the only people who overtake me are those who ignore the speed limit (I usually add on just under 10% to the speedometer reading; to ensure I am not holding other drivers back. And I regularly use my cruise control to keep to a steady maximum speed). The only other problem is those drivers who do not seem to know the difference between safe conditions and when there are hazards to be aware of.

[SRB09]

in that case i would consider you to be a safe driver but in mypersonalexperience i have had nothing but bad experience with drivers of the older genreations, well done to you for keeping a foot of the changing road language and joining a motoring forum as such but i do believe you would fall into a minority of drivers your age who do such

i feel older drivers get cheaper insurance due to the billions of years of no claims they get but i still do not feel this would take into account the health of a certain percentage of these drivers

if there is no issue with the standard of older peoples driving why do they object to the notion of resitting a test

and as per the 49 day ban i recived 3 points just after i passed my test as some pillock was right up behind my car so i could not stop as the lights went through amber to red and i recieved points for this as a traffic light camera caught me :(

I then recieved a further 3 nearly 2 years into my license in an unfamilliar part of yorkshire 3 hours from home for parking about 10 cm within the limits of a zebra crossing, at 4:30 am trying to look after my very drunk cousin after a wedding

the area of town being empty bar myself my cousin and a jumped up police woman

neither have been for speeding or presenting any risk

[Rolebama]

SRB09: How do you think that older drivers get these 'billions of years of no claims' you talk about?
Christmas crackers? Tooth Fairy? No, they get them because they can drive safely and proficiently, and the No Claims Bonus they receive reflects this. This Forum has a few threads on it relative to the supposed dangers of older drivers, yet, surprisingly, it is the young, inexperienced drivers who ask the majority of 'I have been accused of driving without insurance', or 'I have just had an accident' threads. Go and ask any TrafPol who they think cause most accidents, or infringe most motoring regulations as a group, and do not be too shocked to not hear them say - The Old.

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by SRB09

if there is no issue with the standard of older peoples driving why do they object to the notion of resitting a test

Is there any evidence that older drivers would object to retaking a driving test? Yes, some probably would object, and some would almost certainly fail.

I don't think it would scare me to retake the test, if it became a requirement.

Whether it was the old really basic test that I took (September 1953), or the current test for new drivers, it is reasonable to expect every driver to vastly improve his/her driving ability as they gain experience.

So it should follow that, over the years, drivers who took only the basic test as it was then, should not be any worse for only taking that basic test. Young, old, or anywhere in between, there will always be good and not-so-good drivers; that's human nature.

Where the whole argument falls down is this. If the older drivers, who took only the basic test, are inherently worse drivers than the younger ones who have taken the current, more stringent test, then why do the statistics show the older driver to be a better risk than the younger ones?

Regardless of all the shouting, the main aim of government and road safety bodies is to bring down the accident rates, and prevent the depressing annual carnage on our roads. If the government and these bodies believed that this problem could be solved by vetting the ability of older drivers, I am sure they would have brought in legislation by now. But they haven't, and you have to ask yourself "why?" Is it because they know that targetting older drivers is not going to resolve the accident statistics.

Another point, entirely without statistical backing, which may not go down very well, is this. On the basis that all the professionals in the RTC business seem to agree that speed is the cause of most of today's problems and, whilst accepting that excessively slow crawling is a nuisance we can do without, is it possible that the government and road safety bodies see the presence of the older "sedate" driver as a cost effective tool in helping to keep the general speed down to reasonable levels?

Sounds unlikely, yet fact is often stranger than fiction.

Regards, Snowball.

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by SRB09

58 isnt really old to be fair though im refering more toward the late 60s and 70s 80s bracket

i think you still have at least another year in you ;)

May I refer you to post #32 in this thread, I would say what I observed was about a normal. Every one of all age groups make mistakes, the problem is it takes experience to know a mistake has been made. A good driver will be able to accommodate whatever happens, with experience you will learn to expect the unexpected.

This post was triggered off by an incident today: A busy street narrowed by parked cars on one side down to the point where two vehicles might just pass, in other words single file traffic. In front a gray haired lady stops for a crocodile of handicapped children crossing the road, I stop behind her positioning myself to block any drive round attempt, because of the way the young hero had been behaving behind. Of course he had to stop, we were now treated to a somewhat monotonic tune on his horn, a demonstration of the functionality of his headlights, (somewhat wasted because it was daylight) all accompanied by shouts and gestures from our boy. His next tantrum involved inching his car forward to touch my rear bumper, I decided to get out and congratulate him on his superb clutch control. I am, in spite of my age still over 6 feet tall, he may have been confused by this, he looked as though he was a metric fed child, in his confusion he closed his windows, stopped playing his boring tune and reversed into the car behind. Not wishing to converse through his closed window and thinking that it would be tactless to compliment him on his clutch control now, I returned to my car. As the road ahead cleared, I reluctantly left this scene of youthful driving excellence. In my rear-view mirror I could see I was missing another master class conducted by two young male drivers, both shouting and waving their arms at each other, you may understand what this symbolised, but I am afraid I am far too old..;)

[smudger]

Goodun that wagolynn, I wish I had been there as by the way you described it, it would have been good to see;)
Cheers, Smudger.

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by stuartex

again (thanks for the school lesson !) and for pointing out the obvious , but i dont think your getting the point i was making , and mabey it was my fault so here goes again , i dont want to raise the limit , i am just talking about me say nipping up the road in my 08 range rover at 3 am empty road and thinking al be home in two mins ( at 85) disregauding any puntures , breakdowns etc as the majority of my cars actually go year in year out without these things happening , so i was goin off my experience and am sorry i veered off the thread now , but it is a comfort to know that there are some well informed and totally fault free drivers on the road , al have to settle with my international licence of twenty years over 5 million accident free miles but hey guess what i still make little faults albeit small , lol

Sorry to but in here, but I agree with the thought that under the right conditions a little extra speed is not a problem.

I have had two blowouts on motorways, one at about 85MPH in a Mini rear wheel. I must have driven about a mile feeling something was not right; a tentative try at changing lanes pinpointed the problem. I gently manoeuvred onto the hard shoulder, slow without brakes, drama over; the tyre was a write off. The second was a front wheel on a front wheel drive Escort pre power steering, no doubt with this one, again manoeuvre over to hard shoulder once onto shoulder use handbrake to help slowing. I would not claim that these were fun things to do, but I would guess that at anything over 40 MPH if you panic then it will end in disaster. So perhaps we should never travel on motorways above about 35. Or we except that travelling on motorways has a risk factor but then driving at all is a big risk.

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by wagolynn

Or we except that travelling on motorways has a risk factor but then driving at all is a big risk.

Driving on any road always carries a risk factor. Quite apart from driving behaviour, any vehicle, from just out of showroom onwards, is capable of developing a fault that affects control of the vehicle; punctures being the most common.

This is where the chances of coming to a safe standstill are greatly dependent upon driving correctly, within the legal speed limit, with adequate distance allowed from vehicles ahead, and with full considerations for road/weather conditions.

Failure for one element can significantly reduce the chances of a safe stop, and failure for all the elements places you in a hopeless situation.

Once control is lost, the laws of physics and the hand of God are all you have left.

[SRB09]

fair play to you sir, i do not in any way tollerate this moronic act of stupidity played out by the **** in the car behind you unfortunately we do get these kind of jack *** idiots on our roads.

i applaud you for your actions.

on another note

the notion that speed is dangerous is ******** i consider anything up to 110 still highly controllable on the provisio that its a motorway and conditions permit and that you carry out regular checks on your vehicle

its the speed its how you drive at speed everyone has different levels of ability

[smudger]

Aye! its true that some drivers can handle driving at speed, and no doubt can plan well ahead for what ever speed they are doing, but its what the other motorists are doing that he has no control over.

As we are always being told, expect the worst so that when it happens, you were ready for it.;)

I have been overtaking on a motorway and had to brake as another driver pulled out to overtake without even checking his mirror, it just takes an incident like that and, .....well you know the rest.:eek:
Cheers, Smudger.

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by SRB09

fair play to you sir, i do not in any way tollerate this moronic act of stupidity played out by the **** in the car behind you unfortunately we do get these kind of jack *** idiots on our roads.

i applaud you for your actions.

on another note

the notion that speed is dangerous is ******** i consider anything up to 110 still highly controllable on the provisio that its a motorway and conditions permit and that you carry out regular checks on your vehicle

its the speed its how you drive at speed everyone has different levels of ability

Here is the nub of the problem, the majority think they can drive and do other things at the same time. A driver who has experience of driving in blue light conditions has made the point else ware on this forum, it is very hard work; he was drained after each call. Anyone exceeding the limit in a built up area should experience the same extreme fatigue, otherwise they are not concentrating on the task in hand, they are just a passenger in the vehicle, how many washed out young bucks do we see?
The flip side is, if traffic is forced to travel too slowly, for the road and conditions, it becomes difficult to concentrate on driving (e.g. nose to tail shunts in queues). Pedestrians also get complacent if traffic is moving slowly.

When we come to motorways some of the work is removed, no pedestrians, no bicycles, no right turns, no traffic stopped to turn left and separated opposing traffic. If you are to travel at speed safely, you must know and understand the dynamics of the vehicle you are driving; this is the first big snag. Normally drivers do not experience the extremes of the performance envelope of their vehicle until they are in a live incident, up till that point ignorance is bliss. Blind faith in, speed limits, well serviced vehicles or saying your prayers every night are not going to make any difference when things go wrong. The driver has to control the situation. To have a reasonable chance of doing this the 2 seconds clearance rule, in front and behind, has to be actively followed, this is just about impossible if you are travelling at the same speed as the rest. If these conditions can be satisfied then I agree with you, better to be travelling quickly and fully aware rather than slower and trusting to your rabbit’s foot. Until this is recognized, serious pileups will continue to happen.

Thinking about this does remind me that one thing that has not been thought about on high-speed roads is an unambiguous signal to indicate a vehicle is in distress. The hazard warning lights are meant to be used when stationary and have no standardised meaning when moving. I have seen on several occasions, drivers with a problem being boxed in by others, preventing them from getting over to the hard shoulder.

[Rolebama]

I believe there is a very clear message from people who drive with their hazards on. It is: "I have no idea about motoring law, I will not be indicating any intention, and am a hazard in my own right, as I am too concerned with other matters to turn my hazard warning lights off." This interprets into: "I am a collision waiting to happen."

[philandy]

Re-testing

I drive a community bus and have to be re-tested every four years, I don't have a problem with re-testing.
I think that every driver should be tested every 10 years under 60 years of age, then every four or five years thier after.
I can't understand drivers who say no to re-testing.

[smudger]

I suppose the cost of all that would be a factor against it happening.
Personally, I think that drivers who are repeat offenders for serious driving offences like dangerous or drunk driving, should be banned for life.

As they have no consideration for other road users and basically a constant threat.
I watched that Road Wars program on TV, and they arrested this young thug seven times for stealing cars and causing accidents and injury while evading arrest. Its folk like that who are a danger to the public, as they just keep re offending:mad: