Should everyone have to resit their driving test every five years?

[Andrew_P]

Place a time limit on any new licence. To renew would involve a medical, paid for by the applicant, before any test could take place.

Manage that and it may be possible to do it for every driver, with a licence.

What I do not understand is why HGV & PSV drivers have these medicals every so many years yet other drivers do not. I accept that a Lorry or Bus is more dangerous than a car but only more dangerous, a Car is just as much of a lethal weapon just cannot do as much carnage in one go as Bus or HGV

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Ask yourself about the cars' contribution to climate change. Imagine how far it could go. Wonder if that's a good thing or not. Then lash out at those wanting something better.

Ha, that reminds me of this...

 

[Sharky]

One of my Uncles, never took a driving test.

He was taught to drive a tank in the army (WW2) and it qualified him for his driving licence.

 

[classic33]

What I do not understand is why HGV & PSV drivers have these medicals every so many years yet other drivers do not. I accept that a Lorry or Bus is more dangerous than a car but only more dangerous, a Car is just as much of a lethal weapon just cannot do as much carnage in one go as Bus or HGV

The last time pre-test medicals were raised as a posibility for new drivers it just faded away.

The political will to enforce it wasn't there.

The biggest "error" at present is being allowed to plead hardship if you were to lose your licence, and have it accepted. That makes the point system useless.

A "Three strikes & you're out" policy may work better. Would it stop them driving with no licence, who knows.

 

[slowmotion]

The Swiss have quite a clever driving test. Within three years of passing the initial test you have to do two additional one day courses.

https://www.angloinfo.com/how-to/switzerland/transport/driving-licences/driving-test

 

[Ming the Merciless]

We create a simulator and you tell the driver they must cross the finish line within a set time limit. We then have pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders appear in the simulation. Every time they make a close pass, bad manuevers, speed, drive too close, 10 seconds is added to their time. Hit anyone and they fail. You do not tell them the real test is to see that their driving remains at the standarda expected when under time pressure.

 

[Dirk]

You do not tell them the real test is to see that their driving remains at the standarda expected when under time pressure.

The second person to take the test would probably know that.

 

[classic33]

We create a simulator and you tell the driver they must cross the finish line within a set time limit. We then have pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders appear in the simulation. Every time they make a close pass, bad manuevers, speed, drive too close, 10 seconds is added to their time. Hit anyone and they fail. You do not tell them the real test is to see that their driving remains at the standarda expected when under time pressure.

Driving on the roads shouldn't be seen or treated as a race.

 

[StuAff]

Part of the problem, IMHO, is that the standards between vehicles are inconsistent. Just renewed my CBT for the bike this morning, with a view to taking a full licence course in a few months (I had October pencilled in for that, but even if I took to a geared bike very quickly, the wait for the local test centre is now up to December...!!). Consider what a newly qualified young learner can drive and ride..
At 17, on an automatic-only licence, you can drive a Bugatti Chiron if you can pay the bills. 1479 hp......not recommended unless you're Max Verstappen.
What can you ride at 17? Max 125cc, 14.75 bhp (A1 category, same as you can ride with a CBT certificate).
For A2 (47 bhp): 19 years old
A (unrestricted licence)- anything road-legal, even Honda's RC213VS (MotoGP for the road) bike or 200+ bhp screamers...24, or 21 if you've held A2 for two years.
To me, that's nuts...

 

[jarlrmai]

The most crazy thing is cars and motorbikes can be as powerful as they want and the only real thing keeping the numbers down is price and insurance cost.

 

[StuAff]

[QUOTE 4981012, member: 45"]Yeah, it looks daft, but it's based on likelihood and risk. A 17 year old is never going to get their hands on a super car, but could buy a motorbike capable of stupid speeds and acceleration for a few hundred quid.[/QUOTE]
You've got a point, indeed, the likes of a Fireblade/R1 are much more accessible in financial terms, at least in purchase price, but there's one class for cars, regardless of power and weight, with no requirement to demonstrate competency in moving from something small and slow (though, of course, still a potentially lethal weapon) to something massively faster. And a 17 year old on a fast bike is far more likely to come off worse in an road traffic incident than one in any car.

 

[KnackeredBike]

The most crazy thing is cars and motorbikes can be as powerful as they want and the only real thing keeping the numbers down is price and insurance cost.

Car power has been increasing for decades.

Take a Corsa, a very typical first car.

Corsa B in 1992-2000 - the entry level 1.0 car had 40kW. Top of the range 1.6 has 78kW.

Corsa E today the entry level 1.0 is 66kW. Top of the range 1.6t is 152kW. I know they are a bit fatter but that is still a lot more potential energy under the control of an inexperienced driver.

 

[jarlrmai]

Fatter makes it worse they are just more kinetic energy as they are heavier and have a more power to get that mass moving.

 

[byegad]

I'm 66, and have been riding motorbikes and then driving cars for 50 years and would happily retake the test and face having my licence revoke should I fail.

I would suffer some hardships without the ability to drive, but if it meant that roads in the UK became safer for all it would be well worth the individual price.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Sorry if this has already been said but it's a long thread.
Some back of napkin calculations:
As of late 2014 there are 45.5m licensed drivers in the UK. I'm assuming it hasn't changed that much.
The driving test costs £62. I'm making a big assumption that it pays for itself - neither subsidised nor an earner.
If all license holders drive and need retesting every five years (obviously not but bear with me) that's (45.5m*62)/5 or £564m a year spent on tests.
The entire UK population was 65.64m in 2016 so that's enough to spend £8.60 per capita per year on, say, cycling infrastructure on top of the quid or so we spend now.