Join TSR now and chat about whatever you’re intoSign up now

Young drivers could face curfew Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    I'd wager it's a mix of lack of experience [how many driving instructors have lessons at 11pm?], complacency and getting too far ahead of themselves/carried away with people inside.


    That's all well and good, things likes TCAS, transponders, ATC and autopilots do make flying safer, but at considerable cost. How many new drivers are going to be willing or able to pay £100,000+ on a car with systems like that built in? And where does the rest of the infrastructure come from to make systems like that viable?
    Having a 'black box' to record what's going on is fine. But control? The tech isn't there yet, especially not for single vehicles that are being run on a shoestring budget.
    I think that technology is further ahead than you think, people just don't trust it. Steer-by-wire and brake-by-wire are both fully developed and working (and I think might be starting to be used in some new cars), and once you have a full drive-by-wire control system, the AI to control that will be fairly soon behind.
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think any of these proposed solutions will help much. The problem is young drivers' maturity. Boy racer types will continue to drive fast and crash their cars; the problem isn't their ability but their disposition to macho recklessness.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    I think that technology is further ahead than you think, people just don't trust it. Steer-by-wire and brake-by-wire are both fully developed and working (and I think might be starting to be used in some new cars), and once you have a full drive-by-wire control system, the AI to control that will be fairly soon behind.
    Braking systems are coming along, that's true, but steering is still a ways off.

    And neither come cheap. That's the major thing here. Most cars that come with such equipment are going to cost well in excess of £30,000. And they'll be optional extras.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    I'd wager it's a mix of lack of experience [how many driving instructors have lessons at 11pm?], complacency and getting too far ahead of themselves/carried away with people inside.
    I understand that, but I don't see how it's a recent phenomenon? Weren't young drivers doing that ten or twenty years ago too?


    (Original post by Drewski)
    That's all well and good, things likes TCAS, transponders, ATC and autopilots do make flying safer, but at considerable cost. How many new drivers are going to be willing or able to pay £100,000+ on a car with systems like that built in? And where does the rest of the infrastructure come from to make systems like that viable?
    Having a 'black box' to record what's going on is fine. But control? The tech isn't there yet, especially not for single vehicles that are being run on a shoestring budget.
    I didn't quite mean it to the extent you are implying, but we are constantly seeing cars advertised with onboard computer safety functions. One of the latest Ford Focus cars - for instance - has a computer system which detects drifting across lanes and alerts the driver with an alarm. So if you started to doze off and drift, you'd be woken up. Lots of technologies like this are being invented all the time, and we've seen prototype cars with even more sophisticated systems installed. It's only a matter of time before such are common-place in cars at normal prices. It should certainly be part of the solution to road traffic problems to expedite the integration of technology into driving.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    I understand that, but I don't see how it's a recent phenomenon? Weren't young drivers doing that ten or twenty years ago too?
    Well, for one there are an awful lot more cars on the road than there ever has been before. But largely, no, it isn't a new phenomenon, it's just that in the recent past successive governments have decided that the inevitability of accidents happening isn't actually an inevitability at all. Don't know why, but they have. If you have 30million cars all using the same bits of space then chances are there'll be some crashes, even with very good drivers at the wheel.

    I didn't quite mean it to the extent you are implying, but we are constantly seeing cars advertised with onboard computer safety functions. One of the latest Ford Focus cars - for instance - has a computer system which detects drifting across lanes and alerts the driver with an alarm. So if you started to doze off and drift, you'd be woken up. Lots of technologies like this are being invented all the time, and we've seen prototype cars with even more sophisticated systems installed. It's only a matter of time before such are common-place in cars at normal prices. It should certainly be part of the solution to road traffic problems to expedite the integration of technology into driving.
    I think there is scope for some technology, but that shouldn't override the fact that people need to be better drivers.

    My recommendations would actually go further. New drivers should be tested twice. Once to get their license and then again a year later to make sure they're competent and haven't forgotten everything, and then everybody should be tested every 5 years from then on until they stop driving.

    We test cars every year to make sure they're roadworthy, we should do exactly the same with their drivers.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    I see no harm in doing so - just because motorways are safer than other roads doesn't mean that learners should pass their test without any experience on them...
    True, I don't disagree. I think the main thing is that motorway driving should not be done at the expense of other (imo more important) driving while learning.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JC.)
    I can't think of a country where the alcohol limits are actually set at exactly zero as like you say it's just not practical. Even in those countries with a zero rating they do allow a minute percentage to account for alcohol in food.
    Germany: 0 for anybody who has held their license for less than 2 years

    Italy: 0 for anybody who has held their license for less than 3 years

    Also: Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia: 0 for everybody.

    The tolerance is the systematic error on the breathalyser (i.e. detectable level).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Braking systems are coming along, that's true, but steering is still a ways off.

    And neither come cheap. That's the major thing here. Most cars that come with such equipment are going to cost well in excess of £30,000. And they'll be optional extras.
    Last I heard, Nissan expect Steer-by-wire this year (source).

    I don't know much about the cost - however I imagine one of the big things pushing up the cost currently is as the user's don't trust the technology, usually it is being rolled out alongside traditional technology. Pure *-by-wire will obviously be cheaper - however I still don't know how expensive.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    ...then everybody should be tested every 5 years from then on until they stop driving.

    Ooh don't know about that, seems like a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to me. Ultimately I agree with the sentiment, but every 5 years is impractical and pointless.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    True, I don't disagree. I think the main thing is that motorway driving should not be done at the expense of other (imo more important) driving while learning.
    Yeah, I will agree with that. At the end of the day, then a learner should be taught to deal with everything they can reasonably be expected to have to deal with when they have their licence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm 26, been driving for 1 year and a half. If I got to driving say 2 and half years and this rule came in, would I suddenly have my probation moved up to 3 years? Or is it only for younger people?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    Last I heard, Nissan expect Steer-by-wire this year (source).

    I don't know much about the cost - however I imagine one of the big things pushing up the cost currently is as the user's don't trust the technology, usually it is being rolled out alongside traditional technology. Pure *-by-wire will obviously be cheaper - however I still don't know how expensive.
    Aircraft have been flying with fly-by-wire systems since the 1960s, and commercially since the '80s (the Airbus A320 was the first fully FBW aircraft, it first flew in 1984). They are trusted to land the aircraft in conditions that most pilots would avoid and tend to be more accurate.

    Thirty years on it is still unheard of that aircraft would fly without pilots. And that's with systems that cost millions of pounds. I don't see how any roll out into cars would be quicker.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I disagree with any kind of curfew, I use to live in a rural area where there wasnt alot to do for young people, and just going for a drive with friends, chilling out in cars with takeout food or snacks in general was a little bit of fun at the expense of a driving licence and a late night lol.

    I think most of the points make sense, but like always, someone will get the sharp end of the stick, be it those in rural areas, those who need to run errands for parents or elderly relatives at night,

    Or infact, young taxi drivers? would they be exempt from the passenger rule?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tycho)
    Ooh don't know about that, seems like a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to me. Ultimately I agree with the sentiment, but every 5 years is impractical and pointless.
    Why is it?

    If you've been driving any length of time whatsoever you know there are a great many god-awful drivers of all ages out there. Why should we only restrict poor/inexperienced drivers who are young? Anyone who's crap should be found out and given extra training.

    According to the news reports around this new initiative "a fifth of road accidents resulting in death or serious injury involve drivers under the age of 24".... so what about the other four fifths? Are we supposed to just ignore those deaths? Or should we actually try and do something about it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    From the BBC: the latest government ideas on road safety and young drivers:


    BBC

    According to the Beeb's article, these were among the key suggestions considered for a full green paper set to be published later in the spring:

    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24 - Don't agree with this, I think it should time limited, not age limited. So if you have a curfew for the first 3 years of your license, or until you turn 24, which ever comes first.
    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car - Hmm, a tricky one. Personally I don't agree, but I do think that the zero-alcohol limit should apply to each person in the car if you're under the age of 21.
    • A zero-alcohol limit. - Couldn't agree more
    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience. - Another tricky one, it would put learning costs way up BUT on the other hand you would probably see more learners buying their own car before passing their test, meaning that they would get a lot of experience in that, so it's a double edged sword really.
    • Motorway lessons for learners - Damn right, it seems completely illogical that somebody can pass their test without ever having driven on a motorway before.
    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years - Again, good.
    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time - And lastly, good.


    As someone who's already got their licence, this doesn't affect me directly but I do find it interesting. Out of all the points, I think the minimum learning period makes most sense. I turned 17 and passed my test within six weeks - far too soon, in retrospect. More time on the road = better drivers. Got to be a good thing.
    Some aspects of it I like, although in that proposed form I think it's too restrictive.

    Also, you say that you think the longer learning period would be good, how many people could afford to learn for an entire year? Also, there are many, many people who passed very quickly, like me, who still had more experience than people that take a long time to pass. I passed my test in just under 7 weeks, which is very quick, but I had my own car from the day of my very first lesson and during those 7 weeks I spent somewhere in the region of 100 hours behind the wheel of my own car, as well as having frequent lessons, and I know plenty of people who have done the same, so passing quickly does not necessarily mean that you're not experienced enough.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    • A curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24

      No- It's been well covered already in this thread but one of the reasons for learning to drive is so i can go get a job etc without having to rely on my parents. In the city its fine you cna get a taxi but i live out in the sticks driving is a a vital skill.
      Also 24 is surely too old? i Passed when i was 17 and for the first 2 years maybe i wasn't the best of drivers but now i've been passed 3 and a half years no crashes no speeding tickets etc. I'd say i'm a good driver it would be non-nonsensical to limit my driving for a further 3 years.

    • Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car

      i assume with this point they're imagining a car full of rowdy teenagers distracting the driver?
      One passenger can be distracting if they want to be and tbh most people calm down if the driver tells them too (maybe i'm just not friends with knobs?)
      Also I've driven my family to family events before, having a car full of my family wasn't that bad tbh.

    • A zero-alcohol limit.

      covered already, also i'm not sure what difference it would make

    • A minimum learning period for drivers once they turn 17, so they get more on-the-road experience.

      My driving instructor and my family used to tell me that you only properly learn to drive when you get out onto the road for yourself, the driving instructor can only take you so far.

    • Motorway lessons for learners

      Motorways are simple enough once you're on them, slip roads can be covered on dual carriage ways.

    • Extension of the six-point probationary period from two to three years

      Doesn't make much different to me, if someone is disappointed cos they have to drive sensibly for another year then perhaps they shouldn't be on the road.

    • Driving tests changed to include more unsupervised driving time

      don't understand this one haha


    .
    replies in quote
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Aircraft have been flying with fly-by-wire systems since the 1960s, and commercially since the '80s (the Airbus A320 was the first fully FBW aircraft, it first flew in 1984). They are trusted to land the aircraft in conditions that most pilots would avoid and tend to be more accurate.

    Thirty years on it is still unheard of that aircraft would fly without pilots. And that's with systems that cost millions of pounds. I don't see how any roll out into cars would be quicker.
    I don't think that it is going to be in the near future, but I think that it will progress quicker - mainly because technology is much more embedded in our world, we already trust systems such as GPS (sometimes trust it too much), so I could see computer controlled driving systems being in use (even if not wide-use due to cost) quicker when the technology is ready compared to aircrafts.

    However, we are drifting off topic, of young driver and how to improve safety. Computer assistance will come along, and when technology creates safety improvements; it will do so - however we still need to consider how to keep things safe until then.

    *****

    I agree with Drewski's suggestion of retesting - however I would have a shorter test for retests (e.g. 20 -30 minutes instead of 50-60 minutes), and every 10 or 20 years instead of 5 - I feel that every 5 years would put too much pressure on the DSA. Also, with provisions for retesting as needed, e.g. if they fail, they have 6 months to pass or whatever.

    (Original post by razza1333)
    As someone who has past their test in the past 6 months, ban radios,as they are distracting, however all drivers have them

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You see, I find radios useful when driving on motorways, as it is something to listen to, to keep myself from getting bored - and once you get bored on motorways you start to pay less attention.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As someone who has past their test in the past 6 months, ban radios,as they are distracting, however all drivers have them

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by officelinebacker)
    Some aspects of it I like, although in that proposed form I think it's too restrictive.

    Limit on the number of passengers young drivers can carry in their car - Hmm, a tricky one. Personally I don't agree, but I do think that the zero-alcohol limit should apply to each person in the car if you're under the age of 21.

    Also, you say that you think the longer learning period would be good, how many people could afford to learn for an entire year? Also, there are many, many people who passed very quickly, like me, who still had more experience than people that take a long time to pass. I passed my test in just under 7 weeks, which is very quick, but I had my own car from the day of my very first lesson and during those 7 weeks I spent somewhere in the region of 100 hours behind the wheel of my own car, as well as having frequent lessons, and I know plenty of people who have done the same, so passing quickly does not necessarily mean that you're not experienced enough.
    Wait, why should passengers have to have a zero blood alcohol level? I strongly disagree with this, as I see little use and big inconvenience.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    They can **** right off. I've just started to drive again (yesterday infact) and I'll be damned if they tell me when I can and can't drive. Police state gone mad.
 
 
 
Poll
Should MenACWY vaccination be compulsory at uni?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.