There are plans to let learner drivers have motorway driving lessons withan approved instructor with a dual controlled car. http://news.sky.com/story/learner-drivers-to-be-able-to-use-motorways-under-new-plans-10711488 https://www.gov.uk/government/consu...-learner-drivers-to-take-lessons-on-motorways A good idea or a bad idea, at present it's crazy you pass your test at 9am & at 9:01am drive on a motorway with no experience of doing so. Long overdue having motorway training I say.
As always there are arguments for and against the idea. What is different between dual carriageway and motorway, as far as learning to drive is concerned? What about people who have no motorway near them? Such as norfolk, cornwall, parts of wales and scotand etc? Prsonally I think the test should be in 2 stages. To pass the 1st test to get basic experience, maybe a limit of 12 months/2 years and then a more advanced test to ensure competency to include motorway and other things. Current idea is somehow linked to money or cost im sure, i just cant see the link yet
Depends on the learner, some maybe ok after 5 lessons, others might need 10 lessons, & it should be up to the instructor to decide when he thinks it's safe to do so.
The good thing is that they are restricting so that only learners accompanied by approved (licensed) driving instructors is permitted. So it will be up to the instructor to decide if the learner is viable to go on to a motorway. However, there needs to be an increased vigilance on the quality of driving instructors as I have seen so many down here committing traffic offences with and without pupils on board.
Also need to have a rethink on learners being supervised by other "experienced" drivers. Just because a person has a licence doesn't mean you can teach or supervise someone else. Especially since their knowledge will typically be years out of date and have picked up a lot of bad habits and attitudes.
Should be quailfied instructors only & dual controlled cars, other "experienced" drivers should be banned.
Couldn't agree more. Same as mandatory retesting of drivers as age increases. After my accident a few years ago, I had to redo my test. Wasn't a problem went off and did it
Whilst you are supervising a learner driver you are deemed to be in control of the vehicle, even if you are sitting in the passenger seat. This means that you must abide by the same road traffic laws as if you yourself were driving the vehicle. This includes not supervising a learner driver whilst under the influence of alcohol/drugs and not using a hand held mobile phone whilst supervising a learner driver. You may also not receive any payment for supervising a learner driver unless you are a DSA approved driving instructor. Many supervising drivers are unaware of their legal responsibilities whilst supervising learner drivers. The law requires that supervising drivers: are at least 21 years old have held a full driving licence for a minimum of 3 years for the type of vehicle they are supervising in i.e. manual/auto ensure the car is in a safe and legal condition meet the minimum eyesight standards ensure the car displays L Plates As a supervising driver you should possess a greater amount of driving skill and knowledge than the person you are supervising. That is why you must have held your licence for a minimum of 3 years. To ensure your and your learner’s safety, it is advised that you only supervise drivers if you have plenty driving experience yourself. Remember holding a licence and being an experienced driver are two completely different things. But as always, are there enough police to routine stops and checks?
It will cost the learner a fortune in lessons, if the instructor takes them on M25 to sit for hours between junctions.
Frequently used to stop cars with "L" plates for all sorts of reasons. Quite a few times you would find the person in the front with the driver had no licence, had their licence taken away, was unfit through drink or drugs or had poor eyesight. Sometimes it was stern advice to the supervising driver that maybe they should let the professionals to do it as the cost to their NCB would more than pay for the lessons
One of the most amusing things with a learner on the motorway was when I rode past a guy on his scooter. Waved him over and we stopped on the hard shoulder. As I reached over to my pannier, the kid ran up to me and asked if I had pulled him over because he was riding on the motorway without a licence, I told him whilst it was stupid, that wasn't the reason. He then asked was it because he had destricted his bike, no it is not that, I said - its actually on fire as I grabbed my extinguisher. The kid was so intent on ringing the neck of thing that he hadn't noticed the smoke coming from the back of the scooter. It was like following a Red Arrow when I caught up with him
I'd rephrase that to 'Just because a person has a license doesn't mean they can drive!' Lane-hoggers is what sets me off the most on the motorway. And this whole idea of lane 'speeds', there is no such thing as a fast or slow lane, they are 1,2,3 and onwards. People don't realize it's an offense either.
Its a good idea in theory, but as Jack pointed out what if there's no motorways in your area then what?? Go looking for one just because you have to be trained on one, or restrict drivers in those areas to non motoway roads only.
This is my biggest annoyance, peeps just don't give a dam if they hold you up, they are staying in that middle lane no matter what. Today here it was really foggy, the amount of peeps driving with no lights on was unbelievable.
Same problem with "hill starts", in some locations there isn't one within a reasonable location of a test centre, so the examiner has to rely on an instructor taking a student further afield to practice. Also similarities with night driving, snow and ice, fog