Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
Oct 31st 2002, 12:36 am
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
"Geoff McCaughan" wrote
> In rec.travel.europe nightjar wrote:
> > wrote
> >> It also calls for such
> >> maneuvers as driving backwards around a corner and up the street along
> >> the curb. Touch the curb with the wheel and you flunk.
> > Those are very basic vehicle handling skills. You don't even have to be
able
> > to park in a restricted space. While that was fine when I took my test -
> > there were not many places outside the very centre of London where you
could
> > not just draw up to the kerb - it is a necessary skill in most places
these
> > days.
> How is "driving backwards around a corner" a basic skill - I've never
needed
> to do it in all the years I've been driving, and it sounds like a bloody
> dangerous practice.
Actually, this task is part of the Washington State driver's test. It's
tricky,
because you have to do it in exactly the prescribed method, else you fail
that task (I think it's 4 points out of 100.)
Floyd
> In rec.travel.europe nightjar wrote:
> > wrote
> >> It also calls for such
> >> maneuvers as driving backwards around a corner and up the street along
> >> the curb. Touch the curb with the wheel and you flunk.
> > Those are very basic vehicle handling skills. You don't even have to be
able
> > to park in a restricted space. While that was fine when I took my test -
> > there were not many places outside the very centre of London where you
could
> > not just draw up to the kerb - it is a necessary skill in most places
these
> > days.
> How is "driving backwards around a corner" a basic skill - I've never
needed
> to do it in all the years I've been driving, and it sounds like a bloody
> dangerous practice.
Actually, this task is part of the Washington State driver's test. It's
tricky,
because you have to do it in exactly the prescribed method, else you fail
that task (I think it's 4 points out of 100.)
Floyd
Oct 31st 2002, 1:02 am
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:57:42 -0000, "CeeJay"
wrote:
>Please visit uk.rec.autos.driving for some of the tactics used by British
>police to get convictions.
>For those that can't be arsed to look, they actually tailgate you to get you
>to speed up, then bust you when you go over the speed limit. I kid you not.
They try that one over here too, but they usually get the hell outta
my way when I actually *shed* 5 or 10km/h. Then they pass me and
pick on someone else, exactly as I want.
>>Couple that with a low motorway speed
>> limit, high ga$ price$ and kaboom! Not exactly a motorist's
>> paradise. Plus the fact that they drive on the wrong side too...
>Oi! We drive on the correct side! (I'd love to see figures for the number of
>foreign peds who have been killed/hurt in our respective countries through
>looking the wrong way...)
It's deadly common. I like the painted instructions in London "LOOK
LEFT" and "LOOK RIGHT". This makes sense because sometimes the
traffic is one way or flowing illogically. There is a street in Nice
F right outside the bus station downtown where traffic does actually
flow on the LEFT side (both ways). It's really weird.
>Yes. It still is. And that's one of the reasons the we own small cars that
>run like go-karts. If you're ever over here, drop me a line - I know some of
>the best areas to go and have a good thrash. Clears the soul just as well as
>a good sneeze clears the bronchial tract.
Definitely, CJ - probably won't be until next Xmas ('03) though. I'm
suffering from a fairly serious health problem right now, so I'm
probably better off not travelling long distances in the near
future.
>> Otoh, one probably doesn't even NEED a driver's licence in the UK. I
>> got by perfectly ok without one.
>God help you if you ever get caught driving without one, though.
Oh absolutely: I would never do that, and never did. (Though on a
couple of occasions, I have forgotten to carry my license with me
while driving, which gets one a good slap if pulled over.)
>If you
>don't have a license, you have no insurance. If you have neither of those,
>you are shafted. You *will* spend some time filling out forms in a concrete
>room.
If one were caught *driving* on *public roads* with no
license/insurance, that's very true. While I never held a license in
the UK, I never did drive there, so I never broke the law.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>Please visit uk.rec.autos.driving for some of the tactics used by British
>police to get convictions.
>For those that can't be arsed to look, they actually tailgate you to get you
>to speed up, then bust you when you go over the speed limit. I kid you not.
They try that one over here too, but they usually get the hell outta
my way when I actually *shed* 5 or 10km/h. Then they pass me and
pick on someone else, exactly as I want.
>>Couple that with a low motorway speed
>> limit, high ga$ price$ and kaboom! Not exactly a motorist's
>> paradise. Plus the fact that they drive on the wrong side too...
>Oi! We drive on the correct side! (I'd love to see figures for the number of
>foreign peds who have been killed/hurt in our respective countries through
>looking the wrong way...)
It's deadly common. I like the painted instructions in London "LOOK
LEFT" and "LOOK RIGHT". This makes sense because sometimes the
traffic is one way or flowing illogically. There is a street in Nice
F right outside the bus station downtown where traffic does actually
flow on the LEFT side (both ways). It's really weird.
>Yes. It still is. And that's one of the reasons the we own small cars that
>run like go-karts. If you're ever over here, drop me a line - I know some of
>the best areas to go and have a good thrash. Clears the soul just as well as
>a good sneeze clears the bronchial tract.
Definitely, CJ - probably won't be until next Xmas ('03) though. I'm
suffering from a fairly serious health problem right now, so I'm
probably better off not travelling long distances in the near
future.
>> Otoh, one probably doesn't even NEED a driver's licence in the UK. I
>> got by perfectly ok without one.
>God help you if you ever get caught driving without one, though.
Oh absolutely: I would never do that, and never did. (Though on a
couple of occasions, I have forgotten to carry my license with me
while driving, which gets one a good slap if pulled over.)
>If you
>don't have a license, you have no insurance. If you have neither of those,
>you are shafted. You *will* spend some time filling out forms in a concrete
>room.
If one were caught *driving* on *public roads* with no
license/insurance, that's very true. While I never held a license in
the UK, I never did drive there, so I never broke the law.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 1:28 am
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On 30 Oct 2002 16:16:07 -0800, Ignasi Palou-Rivera
wrote:
>The London Underground is certainly good but at UKP 1.60 for Zone 1
>tickets is not cheap.
I thought it was 1.80 the last time I was there, but maybe I've gone
senile already.
>Public transport in other cities in the UK is much much worse. I used
>to live in the Greater Manchester area and it was quite a pain. And in
>the contry side it's much worse. (Check what people leaving in the
>country side in the UK are complaining about, when you get past the
>dumb arguments about hunting.)
The development density is high enough in the UK that walking, aka
"Shanks' Pony", is often a viable means of transportation.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>The London Underground is certainly good but at UKP 1.60 for Zone 1
>tickets is not cheap.
I thought it was 1.80 the last time I was there, but maybe I've gone
senile already.
>Public transport in other cities in the UK is much much worse. I used
>to live in the Greater Manchester area and it was quite a pain. And in
>the contry side it's much worse. (Check what people leaving in the
>country side in the UK are complaining about, when you get past the
>dumb arguments about hunting.)
The development density is high enough in the UK that walking, aka
"Shanks' Pony", is often a viable means of transportation.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 1:30 am
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On 30 Oct 2002 12:29:53 -0800, Ignasi Palou-Rivera
wrote:
>[email protected] (Ricardo) writes:
>> Otoh, one probably doesn't even NEED a driver's licence in the UK. I
>> got by perfectly ok without one.
>Driving or not driving?
NOT driving of course. I neither advocate nor condone criminal
activity.
>But
>then what isn't too expensive in the UK?
Well, there ARE the famed English g... oh never mind.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>[email protected] (Ricardo) writes:
>> Otoh, one probably doesn't even NEED a driver's licence in the UK. I
>> got by perfectly ok without one.
>Driving or not driving?
NOT driving of course. I neither advocate nor condone criminal
activity.
>But
>then what isn't too expensive in the UK?
Well, there ARE the famed English g... oh never mind.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 1:43 am
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
[email protected] (Brent P) writes:
>In article , CliveM wrote:
>> Backing out of a driveway would be a fail!
>Does one have to back in, instead?
Yes... it's illegal to reverse onto a "major" roadway - which means
in essence any roadway that's better than the one on which you are.
Makes a shirtload of sense except where the major roadway is a
residential cul-de-sac anyway.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!
>In article , CliveM wrote:
>> Backing out of a driveway would be a fail!
>Does one have to back in, instead?
Yes... it's illegal to reverse onto a "major" roadway - which means
in essence any roadway that's better than the one on which you are.
Makes a shirtload of sense except where the major roadway is a
residential cul-de-sac anyway.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!
Oct 31st 2002, 1:45 am
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:36:33 -0330, Terry
wrote:
>During the mentioned UK visit, in 2000, I drove and was driven
>some 1000 miles. UK drivers were very competent. For example,
>only once did I see a motorway driver who did not move back into
>an inner lane after passing;
To be fair, all hope is NOT lost for Canucks when it comes to lane
discipline. I have noticed that they're terribly lazy about merging
right after passing, BUT they nearly always yield the left lane to a
faster vehicle approaching from behind, and they nearly always
respond to the left turn signal for flash-2-pass. Actually needing
to flash the brights or undertake a dangerous undertaking maneuver
(pun intended) is quite rare indeed, in my experience. All Canajuns
need to learn to do is move right directly after passing, rather
than wait for a faster car to barrel down on their ass.
>that was a strange looking European
>vehicle possibly driven by someone unfamiliar with UK road rules?
>I was also very impressed with the skill and behaviour of the
>driver of a more powerful UK car that came up behind that
>'offender'. After waiting patiently for at least half a mile it
>passed, 'very carefully' on the inside of the vehicle that would
>not move over! Could have been a 'road rage' incident in the
>making in some jurisdictions in this world!
Good thing most Canajuns are pretty good (in my experience) when it
comes to moving over. This minimizes "road rage" and helps conserve
not only my high beam bulbs, but the other driver's retinas!
>Also most/all UK drivers appeared to me to have very good control
>of their vehicles and to know and obey road rules, to a much
>greater extent than here.
On the whole, people here seem ok-ish at obeying road rules, with a
few exceptions: STOP signs and speed limits being the main ones. But
that's hardly surprising when speed limits are too low and many STOP
signs are posted unnecessarily, all for the purpose of raising
revenue.
>Don't expect them to actually stop at a 'STOP'
>sign, or come to a complete halt turning on a red light etc.!
Failure to stop before turning right on red is one of my pet peeves.
The way to stop these unlawful (and sometimes dangerous) practices
is to remove all unnecessary STOP signs in accordance with
engineers' recommendations and make much more liberal use of signage
banning turns on red (where appropriate).
>One problem is
>not to get 'rear ended' as happened to my daughter a few months
>back when she DID make a completely legal stop!
I always make legal stops at STOP signs, even though I know most of
those signs exist for revenue and not safety. I have enough on my
plate with fighting potential speeding tix, that I don't want others
to deal with in addition! (Got a dumb parking tix today, my very
first traffic citation. Got towed and impounded too.)
I must admit that I have been honked before because I actually had
the audacity to stop at a 4 way STOP before proceeding... sheesh.
>Seems like the
>other driver (yes it's always the other person's fault!) did not
>expect her to stop. Duh!
That's the result of unnecessary STOP signs for ya. They're about
$$$$$$$$$$$$$ - not safety.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>During the mentioned UK visit, in 2000, I drove and was driven
>some 1000 miles. UK drivers were very competent. For example,
>only once did I see a motorway driver who did not move back into
>an inner lane after passing;
To be fair, all hope is NOT lost for Canucks when it comes to lane
discipline. I have noticed that they're terribly lazy about merging
right after passing, BUT they nearly always yield the left lane to a
faster vehicle approaching from behind, and they nearly always
respond to the left turn signal for flash-2-pass. Actually needing
to flash the brights or undertake a dangerous undertaking maneuver
(pun intended) is quite rare indeed, in my experience. All Canajuns
need to learn to do is move right directly after passing, rather
than wait for a faster car to barrel down on their ass.
>that was a strange looking European
>vehicle possibly driven by someone unfamiliar with UK road rules?
>I was also very impressed with the skill and behaviour of the
>driver of a more powerful UK car that came up behind that
>'offender'. After waiting patiently for at least half a mile it
>passed, 'very carefully' on the inside of the vehicle that would
>not move over! Could have been a 'road rage' incident in the
>making in some jurisdictions in this world!
Good thing most Canajuns are pretty good (in my experience) when it
comes to moving over. This minimizes "road rage" and helps conserve
not only my high beam bulbs, but the other driver's retinas!
>Also most/all UK drivers appeared to me to have very good control
>of their vehicles and to know and obey road rules, to a much
>greater extent than here.
On the whole, people here seem ok-ish at obeying road rules, with a
few exceptions: STOP signs and speed limits being the main ones. But
that's hardly surprising when speed limits are too low and many STOP
signs are posted unnecessarily, all for the purpose of raising
revenue.
>Don't expect them to actually stop at a 'STOP'
>sign, or come to a complete halt turning on a red light etc.!
Failure to stop before turning right on red is one of my pet peeves.
The way to stop these unlawful (and sometimes dangerous) practices
is to remove all unnecessary STOP signs in accordance with
engineers' recommendations and make much more liberal use of signage
banning turns on red (where appropriate).
>One problem is
>not to get 'rear ended' as happened to my daughter a few months
>back when she DID make a completely legal stop!
I always make legal stops at STOP signs, even though I know most of
those signs exist for revenue and not safety. I have enough on my
plate with fighting potential speeding tix, that I don't want others
to deal with in addition! (Got a dumb parking tix today, my very
first traffic citation. Got towed and impounded too.)
I must admit that I have been honked before because I actually had
the audacity to stop at a 4 way STOP before proceeding... sheesh.
>Seems like the
>other driver (yes it's always the other person's fault!) did not
>expect her to stop. Duh!
That's the result of unnecessary STOP signs for ya. They're about
$$$$$$$$$$$$$ - not safety.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 1:48 am
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:36:38 -0500, "R J Carpenter"
wrote:
>Well, not quite "backing around a corner", but years ago when I lived in the
>Boston area, one was well-advised to look both ways when walking across a
>one-way street. Cars would be backing toward you at speed far too often.
Uhmmm, in BOSTON, you have to be expecting literally ANYTHING from
the local drivers (if you can call 'em that - crazies seems more
appropriate). Just stay well away from the roads, use the T and save
your life.
The old Boston philosophy: never use your turn signals, for they
give away your strategy.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>Well, not quite "backing around a corner", but years ago when I lived in the
>Boston area, one was well-advised to look both ways when walking across a
>one-way street. Cars would be backing toward you at speed far too often.
Uhmmm, in BOSTON, you have to be expecting literally ANYTHING from
the local drivers (if you can call 'em that - crazies seems more
appropriate). Just stay well away from the roads, use the T and save
your life.
The old Boston philosophy: never use your turn signals, for they
give away your strategy.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 1:57 am
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:32:56 -0330, Terry
wrote:
>So how one would take that UK 'hand brake' test with such a
>system is a puzzle? It sounds like an antiquated rule; do you
>mean to say that every time one stops at a red light or stop sign
>one puts on and then releases the hand brake????
For stops of more than, say, 15 seconds, I do this. It's the formal
stop routine: handbrake/neutral. It helps to prevent one from being
shunted.
>Granted there seemed to be far fewer stop lights in the UK than
>in North America and that keeps the relatively heavy UK traffic
>moving along briskly. Here (again an area of eastern Canada) the
>proliferation of traffic lights creates a nightmare of stop
>start, petrol consuming, clutch wearing (maybe that's why 85% of
>vehicles here are automatics?) brake wearing, driving. But
>frankly I don't think a considerable percentage of our drivers
>could handle roundabouts (traffic circles) in the proficient
>manner of UK drivers.
We have mini circles/rotaries/roundabouts in Vancouver, but oddly
enough, only in residential areas, where they are (imo) unnecessary
and counterproductive, because they don't help improve the flow of
traffic and they actually hinder emergency vehicles.
>There would be, IMHO, a lot of collisions
>and a lot more "they dunnit, we didn't" arguments.
>For example; one basic four way intersection traffic light, in an
>older residential part of the main city here, was removed, as
>unnecessary and replaced by simple four way 'stop and go' signs;
>vehicle first to arrive or to the right if simultaneously takes
>precedence. There were so many accidents and this in a small city
>of around 100,000 persons, that the lights were reinstalled at
>considerable expense a few months later; so roundabouts - no way.
>So that may give some idea of the lack of skill of many drivers!
Now that I see which Province you appear to be in, that does explain
a lot!
Q. What's the capital of NF?
A. About $4!
Sorry...
>PS. So from this and some other frank posts by us North Americans
>you may be getting a more accurate picture of how well (or
>badly!) we North Americans drive in comparison to UK drivers! No
>wonder our insurance rates are high!
Some places seem to be worse than others...
People here seem to have no problem with yielding passing lanes,
handling 4 way stops and obeying critical roadway markings. Yes
there are the hoons, but where in the world is absent of them? There
are plenty of crazy idiotic drivers in EUrope too, Germany included.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>So how one would take that UK 'hand brake' test with such a
>system is a puzzle? It sounds like an antiquated rule; do you
>mean to say that every time one stops at a red light or stop sign
>one puts on and then releases the hand brake????
For stops of more than, say, 15 seconds, I do this. It's the formal
stop routine: handbrake/neutral. It helps to prevent one from being
shunted.
>Granted there seemed to be far fewer stop lights in the UK than
>in North America and that keeps the relatively heavy UK traffic
>moving along briskly. Here (again an area of eastern Canada) the
>proliferation of traffic lights creates a nightmare of stop
>start, petrol consuming, clutch wearing (maybe that's why 85% of
>vehicles here are automatics?) brake wearing, driving. But
>frankly I don't think a considerable percentage of our drivers
>could handle roundabouts (traffic circles) in the proficient
>manner of UK drivers.
We have mini circles/rotaries/roundabouts in Vancouver, but oddly
enough, only in residential areas, where they are (imo) unnecessary
and counterproductive, because they don't help improve the flow of
traffic and they actually hinder emergency vehicles.
>There would be, IMHO, a lot of collisions
>and a lot more "they dunnit, we didn't" arguments.
>For example; one basic four way intersection traffic light, in an
>older residential part of the main city here, was removed, as
>unnecessary and replaced by simple four way 'stop and go' signs;
>vehicle first to arrive or to the right if simultaneously takes
>precedence. There were so many accidents and this in a small city
>of around 100,000 persons, that the lights were reinstalled at
>considerable expense a few months later; so roundabouts - no way.
>So that may give some idea of the lack of skill of many drivers!
Now that I see which Province you appear to be in, that does explain
a lot!
Q. What's the capital of NF?
A. About $4!
Sorry...
>PS. So from this and some other frank posts by us North Americans
>you may be getting a more accurate picture of how well (or
>badly!) we North Americans drive in comparison to UK drivers! No
>wonder our insurance rates are high!
Some places seem to be worse than others...
People here seem to have no problem with yielding passing lanes,
handling 4 way stops and obeying critical roadway markings. Yes
there are the hoons, but where in the world is absent of them? There
are plenty of crazy idiotic drivers in EUrope too, Germany included.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 2:55 am
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
"Geoff McCaughan" wrote in message news:LJ_v9.2938
> How is "driving backwards around a corner" a basic skill - I've never
needed
> to do it in all the years I've been driving, and it sounds like a bloody
> dangerous practice.
As someone else said, it's part of basic vehicle handling skills . . .
something that most U.S. drivers lack. I've had to do it before. Last time
I remember, I was backing down a narrow one-way street (more of an alley,
actually) to get out of the way of an ambulance that, for some reason, was
going the wrong way. (I wasn't going to argue with him!) I would have
slowed him down doing a (20 point?) turn in the confined space of the narrow
passage, so I just gunned it down the road and around the next corner . . .
in reverse. That way, even though we were both going the wrong way down the
one way (and me in reverse) . . . at least the ambulance wasn't slowed down.
Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous. If you can't
drive skillfully in reverse, you have no business operating a vehicle in any
forward gear, either. IMHO -Dave
> How is "driving backwards around a corner" a basic skill - I've never
needed
> to do it in all the years I've been driving, and it sounds like a bloody
> dangerous practice.
As someone else said, it's part of basic vehicle handling skills . . .
something that most U.S. drivers lack. I've had to do it before. Last time
I remember, I was backing down a narrow one-way street (more of an alley,
actually) to get out of the way of an ambulance that, for some reason, was
going the wrong way. (I wasn't going to argue with him!) I would have
slowed him down doing a (20 point?) turn in the confined space of the narrow
passage, so I just gunned it down the road and around the next corner . . .
in reverse. That way, even though we were both going the wrong way down the
one way (and me in reverse) . . . at least the ambulance wasn't slowed down.
Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous. If you can't
drive skillfully in reverse, you have no business operating a vehicle in any
forward gear, either. IMHO -Dave
Oct 31st 2002, 2:59 am
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
Bob Builder wrote:
> "Frank Matthews" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>>Those are very basic vehicle handling skills.
>>Yes, it's amazing how often I've found it necessary to back around a
>>corner. Wait a minute. Surely it's happened at least once in the last
>>40 years. Well I guess not. But it's still a really basic skill.
>>Perhaps everyone should have to do it while towing a trailer.
> Strange.
> I reverse my car every day.
> Normally getting in and out of parking spots.
The skill was backing the car around a corner. That's quite different
from backing out of a parking space.
Frank Matthews
> The manoeuvre requires some skill to avoid damaging
> other cars or knocking down pedestrians. The driving
> test in the UK requires people to reverse around a corner
> so that this necessary skill can be tested.
As far as I can see they are different and quite unrelated skills.
> When I go to an optician to have my eyes tested I read
> some letters off a chart on the wall. In real life I never
> have cause to do that. Do you think opticians are
> wasting their time ?
The process of reading a chart and seeing are related in a way the
driving requirement does not appear to be.
> Bob
> "Frank Matthews" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>>Those are very basic vehicle handling skills.
>>Yes, it's amazing how often I've found it necessary to back around a
>>corner. Wait a minute. Surely it's happened at least once in the last
>>40 years. Well I guess not. But it's still a really basic skill.
>>Perhaps everyone should have to do it while towing a trailer.
> Strange.
> I reverse my car every day.
> Normally getting in and out of parking spots.
The skill was backing the car around a corner. That's quite different
from backing out of a parking space.
Frank Matthews
> The manoeuvre requires some skill to avoid damaging
> other cars or knocking down pedestrians. The driving
> test in the UK requires people to reverse around a corner
> so that this necessary skill can be tested.
As far as I can see they are different and quite unrelated skills.
> When I go to an optician to have my eyes tested I read
> some letters off a chart on the wall. In real life I never
> have cause to do that. Do you think opticians are
> wasting their time ?
The process of reading a chart and seeing are related in a way the
driving requirement does not appear to be.
> Bob
Oct 31st 2002, 3:01 am
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
BrianE wrote:
> "Barbara Vaughan" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>>Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
>>Can someone explain to me why you're supposed to use your hand brake
>>instead of your foot brake when stopping at a red light?
>>Barbara
> You mean, you really really can't work that out for yourself?
> Just imagine you're on an incline, when you take your foot off the brake you
> roll back into the motorist behind.
>
> Now, if you followed the correct procedure as is explained by your
> instructor regarding a hill start, then this wouldn't happen.
>
> For the purpose of the driving test can you explain why you have a problem
> with the handbrake. Millions of us have manged so far...
>
> Just go with the flow, follow the rules and you'll cruise the test.
>
> B.
There was no mention of there being a hill at the test. I suspect you
expect to have to get to the clutch as well.
Frank Matthews
> "Barbara Vaughan" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>>Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
>>Can someone explain to me why you're supposed to use your hand brake
>>instead of your foot brake when stopping at a red light?
>>Barbara
> You mean, you really really can't work that out for yourself?
> Just imagine you're on an incline, when you take your foot off the brake you
> roll back into the motorist behind.
>
> Now, if you followed the correct procedure as is explained by your
> instructor regarding a hill start, then this wouldn't happen.
>
> For the purpose of the driving test can you explain why you have a problem
> with the handbrake. Millions of us have manged so far...
>
> Just go with the flow, follow the rules and you'll cruise the test.
>
> B.
There was no mention of there being a hill at the test. I suspect you
expect to have to get to the clutch as well.
Frank Matthews
Oct 31st 2002, 4:38 am
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 03:55:24 GMT, "Dave C."
wrote:
>Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous.
It's more dangerous than driving forward, due to reduced visibility.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous.
It's more dangerous than driving forward, due to reduced visibility.
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 4:58 am
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
"Ricardo" wrote in message news:3dc0c36e.31546121@news...
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 03:55:24 GMT, "Dave C."
> wrote:
> >Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous.
> It's more dangerous than driving forward, due to reduced visibility.
Granted. But that doesn't mean that it's dangerous. -Dave
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 03:55:24 GMT, "Dave C."
> wrote:
> >Driving in reverse, even around corners, is not dangerous.
> It's more dangerous than driving forward, due to reduced visibility.
Granted. But that doesn't mean that it's dangerous. -Dave
Oct 31st 2002, 5:58 am
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 21:44:32 -0330, Terry
wrote:
[park with e-brake on and in gear]
>We tend to do both. Lots'a hills here!
Me too, outta habit. The procedure is simple:
When parking, ALWAYS engage the parking brake. If facing UPHILL,
engage 1st gear, if facing DOWNHILL, engage R gear, if on a level,
it doesn't really matter (ok to park in neutral).
>Some newer vehicles (including ours) seem to have interlock; i.e.
>engine won't crank at all unless clutch fully depressed (whether
>in gear or not)!
Newer vehicles? Mine from '89 has this annoying "feature"!
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
[park with e-brake on and in gear]
>We tend to do both. Lots'a hills here!
Me too, outta habit. The procedure is simple:
When parking, ALWAYS engage the parking brake. If facing UPHILL,
engage 1st gear, if facing DOWNHILL, engage R gear, if on a level,
it doesn't really matter (ok to park in neutral).
>Some newer vehicles (including ours) seem to have interlock; i.e.
>engine won't crank at all unless clutch fully depressed (whether
>in gear or not)!
Newer vehicles? Mine from '89 has this annoying "feature"!
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
Oct 31st 2002, 6:08 am
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Getting a Driver's License Is a Royal Pain in Britain
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 21:23:11 +0000, Bob
wrote:
>The hand brake is not applied to bring the vehicle to a stop. The hand
>brake is applied after the vehicle has come to a stop. No, the brake
>lights don't come on when the hand brake is applied, in much the same
>way as they don't come on when you shift into "Park" with your auto box.
Nate doesn't drive an "auto box", afaik. He, like me and many others
around here, prefers a real tranny.
>As a UK citizen who passed his test over 20 years ago and still applies
>the hand brake when at a stop (I do it without thinking about it... a
>bit like depressing the clutch when changing gear in a manual) I can
>appreciate the reasons for its use. Others see things differently and
>I'm not about the teach granny to suck eggs.
I do too, for longer stops. I was never taught to do so in any test
or by any instructor/examiner; I just do the formal stop outta habit
if I see I'm gonna hafta wait a while (i.e. X street has a fresh
green/green filter cycle).
>Whilst on the subject, I've found (when hiring cars in Italy) that
>Italians generally seem to leave their cars in 1st gear after turning
>off the ignition... and don't apply the hand brake!
1st gear is for parking on an incline; R gear is for parking on a
descent. Parking in neutral is fine on level ground. One should
*always* engage the e-brake when parking.
>I remember once
>getting into my brand new hire car, turning on the ignition and promptly
>smashing into the low brick wall positioned in front of my car. I now
>automatically check that the car is out of gear before turning on the
>ignition... something that I was taught when learning to drive, but had
>forgotten to do over the years as I always leave it in neutral before
>leaving the car.
The clutch/ignition interlock "feature", mandatory in North America
to help minimize litigation (yes, really! ) prevents this. I
still find it annoying though (clutch hasta be depressed dang hard)
and I always (well usually) check for neutral by wobbling the
shifter laterally before startup. It's just a habit, I guess.
>My Italian cousins are astonished by my frequent use of the hand brake,
>and ridicule me when I leave the car without putting it in gear first.
>Each to his own eh?
Leaving the car parked in neutral is totally fine on level ground. I
usually park in gear myself (1 or R depending on hill direction).
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca
wrote:
>The hand brake is not applied to bring the vehicle to a stop. The hand
>brake is applied after the vehicle has come to a stop. No, the brake
>lights don't come on when the hand brake is applied, in much the same
>way as they don't come on when you shift into "Park" with your auto box.
Nate doesn't drive an "auto box", afaik. He, like me and many others
around here, prefers a real tranny.
>As a UK citizen who passed his test over 20 years ago and still applies
>the hand brake when at a stop (I do it without thinking about it... a
>bit like depressing the clutch when changing gear in a manual) I can
>appreciate the reasons for its use. Others see things differently and
>I'm not about the teach granny to suck eggs.
I do too, for longer stops. I was never taught to do so in any test
or by any instructor/examiner; I just do the formal stop outta habit
if I see I'm gonna hafta wait a while (i.e. X street has a fresh
green/green filter cycle).
>Whilst on the subject, I've found (when hiring cars in Italy) that
>Italians generally seem to leave their cars in 1st gear after turning
>off the ignition... and don't apply the hand brake!
1st gear is for parking on an incline; R gear is for parking on a
descent. Parking in neutral is fine on level ground. One should
*always* engage the e-brake when parking.
>I remember once
>getting into my brand new hire car, turning on the ignition and promptly
>smashing into the low brick wall positioned in front of my car. I now
>automatically check that the car is out of gear before turning on the
>ignition... something that I was taught when learning to drive, but had
>forgotten to do over the years as I always leave it in neutral before
>leaving the car.
The clutch/ignition interlock "feature", mandatory in North America
to help minimize litigation (yes, really! ) prevents this. I
still find it annoying though (clutch hasta be depressed dang hard)
and I always (well usually) check for neutral by wobbling the
shifter laterally before startup. It's just a habit, I guess.
>My Italian cousins are astonished by my frequent use of the hand brake,
>and ridicule me when I leave the car without putting it in gear first.
>Each to his own eh?
Leaving the car parked in neutral is totally fine on level ground. I
usually park in gear myself (1 or R depending on hill direction).
--
ricardo, ex-euroslav
vancouver bc canada
e-mail: sovietjamaicanguy yahoo ca