UK Driving test: Learners must be able to use sat navs - Sensationalist Headlines

TBH I'm not fond of using GPS while I'm driving. I prefer to look at the route prior and only consulting GPS if I'm lost. It feels like doing this helps me memorize locations and directions easier. If I rely on GPS it seems like I have no spatial awareness. [editline]15th April 2017[/editline] Also I think road signs are extremely important and GPS is not a good substitute for using road signs.

[QUOTE=reedbo;52109610]TBH I'm not fond of using GPS while I'm driving. I prefer to look at the route prior and only consulting GPS if I'm lost. It feels like doing this helps me memorize locations and directions easier. If I rely on GPS it seems like I have no spatial awareness. [editline]15th April 2017[/editline] Also I think road signs are extremely important and GPS is not a good substitute for using road signs.[/QUOTE] I dunno, I use GPS for most things cause it's easy. That being said, I do find it typically takes me longer to memorize a route, but not hugely. Instead of learning the route from the first time, it'll take me 4 drives or so until I can do it zoned out. Ain't no way I'm going to a new city or place without GPS. Makes searching for things needlessly annoying.

[QUOTE=loopoo;52109669]I dunno, I use GPS for most things cause it's easy. That being said, I do find it typically takes me longer to memorize a route, but not hugely. Instead of learning the route from the first time, it'll take me 4 drives or so until I can do it zoned out. Ain't no way I'm going to a new city or place without GPS. Makes searching for things needlessly annoying.[/QUOTE] No doubt, it's great for finding places and calculating routes. Navigating a dense city is infuriating without GPS, one way streets are super annoying to navigate around.

I try to avoid using my GPS aside from long drives. It gets awkward if you're dependent on it and your phone is dead or something and you can't even figure out what should be a basic drive home.

[QUOTE=loopoo;52108514]Depends where you live in the UK. If I took my test in my hometown, I'd be pottering around suburbs for about 30 mins. I took my test in Newcastle though, which is a pretty big city. They basically made me go around everywhere. Only place that is off-limits is the motorway. I think that's really weird. We're not allowed to drive on the motorway during our lessons or exam, but the second we pass the test, we can drive on the motorway with 0 experience.[/QUOTE] The scariest part of my testing experience is, after pottering around a suburb for 5 minutes in a small four-pot FWD personal econo/sports car thingy with all of 90HP, I was given a license that enabled me to drive this monster. At age 16. With fuck all experience. [t]http://ep.yimg.com/ay/yhst-33652407708730/military-truck-2-5-ton-parts-for-m35a2-m35a3-g-742-deuce-and-a-half-6.jpg[/t] WTF, Tennessee?! [QUOTE=Teddybeer;52109946]One of my driving lessons was a 60 km trip to Schiphol and 60 km back to my middle of somewhere home in one go. Not having a job back then I would just plan in double driving lessons and make decently long trips through cities and rural towns. The test itself involved a bit of everything as the test station was minutes away from a city and a highway. I thought I surely fucked it by parking the car on the diving line of the parking spaces, but I passed the test.[/QUOTE] Mm. Bit more stringent than mine for sure. If I were to design a driving test it would consist of: * 20hrs on a skidpan correcting for various types of skids * At minimum, 8 hours on the interstate, preferrably with at least one exit and entrance on a cloverleaf ramp * Downtown stop-and-go streetlights * Suburbia * Parallel parking * Towing a trailer of approximately 16 feet in length, two axles, with 3,000 pounds load, in both forward driving and in reverse(A rig still well below the actual maximum a Class D license enables people to operate) * How to handle properly entering and exiting the shoulder of a highway, also how to park on the shoulder to maximise safety. * How to handle a manual transmission vehicle in daily traffic * How to handle a car that's had various common mechanical and electrical failures, such as catastrophic tire failure, loss of power assist on steering and brakes, loss of electronic driver's aids * How to navigate without using a satnav It'd be real thorough and take students a couple weeks to actually crunch through, but I feel it'd make people better drivers. At minimum, they'd prove they had the skills necessary to operate the vehicles their license allows them to operate.[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52109885]I try to avoid using my GPS aside from long drives. It gets awkward if you're dependent on it and your phone is dead or something and you can't even figure out what should be a basic drive home.[/QUOTE] I try to minimize the amount of time I'm on a satnav, learn how road signs...especially on freeways...are set up. Signage can be lacking in older areas of downtown, of Suburbia, and especially of Rural America, but the freeways are all quite consistent and well signed. One should be able to get from any major city in America to any major city in America via interstate by just going down the signs.

It took me nearly three months in total to get my drivers license. Here's the gist. One and a half month of theory, school written exam and then a national theoretical exam. Afterwards I had practical work. 1. Minimal of 14 hours of driving with an instructor. This is done through the hardest and unusual driving parts of the city to understand nich'e's. 2. Ability to park in a garage(reverse), parallel, 3 point turn, start from a hill and drive next to a till so you can active it(like a card entrance gate). 3. Do a school practical exam. Once that is done you got a do a national test. 1.You gotta know basic knowledge about a vehicle. 2.Do 2 parking jobs from the aforementioned, one being parallel parking. 3. Driving around 40 minutes around the town through any route the exam accepter desires. Also you must know if he is leading you to a unallowed area. Only then can you get a license in my country.

Dunno how difficult it is in Latvia, but theory in the UK is a piss take. Literally signed up for it, revised two days before it for an hour or two, just to give me an idea of what would come up. Most are super easy multiple choice questions, some are harder cause they refer to road sign colours or tire tread depth. Last part of the exam is a video and you gotta click when you see a hazard. Passed it first time and it made me wonder why people even get stressed about it. [editline]16th April 2017[/editline] Most of the questions were obvious cause the right answer was the only one that made any common sense. The others would be stupid answers like "overtake dangerously at high speed" or "cut the other driver off without indicating".

Reminds me of the motorcycle licence theory test here, with questions such as: What should you do before riding a motorcycle while under the influence of illegal drugs? A. Drink some coffee B. Ride very slowly C. You shouldn't ride a motorcycle while under the influence of illegal drugs D. Wear bright colours

[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;52113302]It took me nearly three months in total to get my drivers license. Here's the gist. One and a half month of theory, school written exam and then a national theoretical exam. Afterwards I had practical work. 1. Minimal of 14 hours of driving with an instructor. This is done through the hardest and unusual driving parts of the city to understand nich'e's. 2. Ability to park in a garage(reverse), parallel, 3 point turn, start from a hill and drive next to a till so you can active it(like a card entrance gate). 3. Do a school practical exam. Once that is done you got a do a national test. 1.You gotta know basic knowledge about a vehicle. 2.Do 2 parking jobs from the aforementioned, one being parallel parking. 3. Driving around 40 minutes around the town through any route the exam accepter desires. Also you must know if he is leading you to a unallowed area. Only then can you get a license in my country.[/QUOTE] Good lord, this makes the American licensing system look like a joke. I waited until I was over 18, paid like 25 bucks for a shitty (certified) online course, skipped through the required material in about three days and passed all the questions (with unlimited retries that just shuffled the question order), printed out my knowledge course certificate, and went into the DMV. The physical driving test was basically driving around the block. I started off with parallel parking, then just went in a circle through two stoplights. Took less than 10 minutes. No driving with an instructor required once you're over 18, and before then most people just have their parents fabricate it since that counts anyways. And then I taught myself stick-shift without ever needing a different license and without ever having learned about how to drive a manual.

[QUOTE=TacticalBacon;52119029]Reminds me of the motorcycle licence theory test here, with questions such as: What should you do before riding a motorcycle while under the influence of illegal drugs? A. Drink some coffee B. Ride very slowly C. You shouldn't ride a motorcycle while under the influence of illegal drugs D. Wear bright colours[/QUOTE] Friend of mine had a question about how hot the radiator was after driving 90 km/h for 3 hours and then standing still for 30 minutes parking. wtf why should you know that unless you're a mechanic? Also had a question about how many shots a beer with 5.2 % alcohol was. Like Im gonna calculate that before Im driving.

[QUOTE=loopoo;52108212]I passed my driving test with 1 minor :smug: Only reason I didn't pass with a perfect score is cause the instructor told me to go down a dead-end road leading off from a roundabout and said "Do a 3-point turn". The road was empty, there were no cars on it, no pedestrians. I didn't check my blind spots when doing it, RIP. If I'd have known [B]you still have to check for blind spots when you know there's literally no one there[/B], I wouldn't have goofed up.[/QUOTE] Super late to this thread, but this really bugs me. You can't know that there's nobody there unless you check your blindspots. I know that you're saying it would be almost impossible for someone to be there, and I've gotten annoyed at being called out on that too (same situation, literally being able to see there was nobody in the surrounding area before attempting maneuvres), but prudence has always got to win. It's just good practice to always check and if you don't you'll become negligent. When you assume, you make an ass of u and me. When you assume in a car, you do that but also maybe kill people.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;52120045]Super late to this thread, but this really bugs me. You can't know that there's nobody there unless you check your blindspots. I know that you're saying it would be almost impossible for someone to be there, and I've gotten annoyed at being called out on that too (same situation, literally being able to see there was nobody in the surrounding area before attempting maneuvres), but prudence has always got to win. It's just good practice to always check and if you don't you'll become negligent. When you assume, you make an ass of u and me. When you assume in a car, you do that but also maybe kill people.[/QUOTE] I think I know what he's getting at, because I used to daily a Chevy Silverado 1500 with a camper shell and you couldn't actually check your farthest blind spot. You'd evaluate traffic in that lane, signal, and pray somebody didn't nab your blank spot from another lane.

[QUOTE=Craigewan;52108190]If it is wet and they've just been through a puddle of water, that's the only acceptable reason for people to be braking on an open road with no other hazards (vehicle ahead of them suddenly slowing down etc). Get the brakes dry whilst you're on a straight.[/QUOTE] Its dryer than the desert and theres nobody in sight.

Shouldn't satnav be supplemental to driving rather than a requirement. Seems a little backwards considering you can drive without it at all.

[QUOTE=Tetsmega;52123578]Shouldn't satnav be supplemental to driving rather than a requirement. Seems a little backwards considering you can drive without it at all.[/QUOTE] Not really, the UK driving test is designed to test your circumstantial knowledge. Whilst you can travel without a SatNav, most people will travel with one during their lives - thus it is worth testing them on how they use one. The UK driving test also tests you on what to do when driving near horses/bicycles and how to do three-point-turns; both of these are also important but circumstantial knowledge.

[QUOTE=Mythman;52124343]Not really, the UK driving test is designed to test your circumstantial knowledge. Whilst you can travel without a SatNav, most people will travel with one during their lives - thus it is worth testing them on how they use one. The UK driving test also tests you on what to do when driving near horses/bicycles and how to do three-point-turns; both of these are also important but circumstantial knowledge.[/QUOTE] Just curious, but do they also test on analog map reading or something similar?

[QUOTE=Tetsmega;52125812]Just curious, but do they also test on analog map reading or something similar?[/QUOTE] They can with a basic map. With the independent driving part of the test they can either give you a basic drawing of a map, or tell you to follow signs for something. Though if you go the wrong way you don't get any faults as long as you do everything correctly when you go the wrong way. [video=youtube;d-Y5KJImN9I]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Y5KJImN9I[/video]

Took me 4.5 hours of paid driver training here in AUS to get my provisional license. (with learners exemption, which is incredibly easy to attain)

[QUOTE=Mythman;52124343]Not really, the UK driving test is designed to test your circumstantial knowledge. Whilst you can travel without a SatNav, most people will travel with one during their lives - thus it is worth testing them on how they use one. The UK driving test also tests you on what to do when driving near horses/bicycles and how to do three-point-turns; both of these are also important but circumstantial knowledge.[/QUOTE] I guess I really never thought of using a satnav as a "skill". I always thought they were pretty straightforward to use.

I'd gladly vote for more strict drivers tests here in the states. We've got 12.9 traffic fatalities per 100,000 vehicles a year, compared to the UK's 5.1. All I had to do was pass a written test, and drive a 1/4 mile in the country and go through one traffic light and park along a curb, not even a parallel park. No required course work, instructions, or additional exams. I've now driven a few hundred thousand miles with not even a minor incident, but that's because of a lot of defensive driving to combat blatant idiots on the roads.

[QUOTE=Ajacks;52129792]I'd gladly vote for more strict drivers tests here in the states. We've got 12.9 traffic fatalities per 100,000 vehicles a year, compared to the UK's 5.1. All I had to do was pass a written test, and drive a 1/4 mile in the country and go through one traffic light and park along a curb, not even a parallel park. No required course work, instructions, or additional exams. I've now driven a few hundred thousand miles with not even a minor incident, but that's because of a lot of defensive driving to combat blatant idiots on the roads.[/QUOTE] What's the argument people have against this? There must be some reason the states haven't done it yet?

[QUOTE=Morgen;52129835]What's the argument people have against this? There must be some reason the states haven't done it yet?[/QUOTE] Because there isn't much of a good alternative. It's really hard to argue it when we simply don't have the infastructure to support non-drivers. If somebody doesn't pass, what then? Sure you can use public transport in urbanized areas but you're effectively screwed outside of that. The ability to get food and work frequently revolves around driving. Not that it excuses it, but try and pass that bill and it will get struck down almost immediately because of that what if scenario.

[QUOTE=Morgen;52129835]What's the argument people have against this? There must be some reason the states haven't done it yet?[/QUOTE] I'm sure some states have stricter requirements than mine (Indiana) but overall, the extra expense required to actually set up teaching facilities and have them staffed would be huge since almost everyone owns a car and drives it daily. It's impossible to live in the US without driving daily in the vast majority of the country.

[QUOTE=Ajacks;52130457]I'm sure some states have stricter requirements than mine (Indiana) but overall, the extra expense required to actually set up teaching facilities and have them staffed would be huge since almost everyone owns a car and drives it daily. It's impossible to live in the US without driving daily in the vast majority of the country.[/QUOTE] The UK doesn't have government driving schools. Just test centres.

[QUOTE=Demache;52129716]I guess I really never thought of using a satnav as a "skill". I always thought they were pretty straightforward to use.[/QUOTE] You can easily get distracted by a sat nav

[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;52130662]You can easily get distracted by a sat nav[/QUOTE] I mean that's true, but that's kinda true of everything in the vehicle.

[QUOTE=Demache;52130761]I mean that's true, but that's kinda true of everything in the vehicle.[/QUOTE] On the UK test you can be asked to use various functions of the car while driving.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;52120045]Super late to this thread, but this really bugs me. You can't know that there's nobody there unless you check your blindspots. I know that you're saying it would be almost impossible for someone to be there, and I've gotten annoyed at being called out on that too (same situation, literally being able to see there was nobody in the surrounding area before attempting maneuvres), but prudence has always got to win. It's just good practice to always check and if you don't you'll become negligent. When you assume, you make an ass of u and me. When you assume in a car, you do that but also maybe kill people.[/QUOTE] I totally agree with this, man. I always check blindspots, especially in crowded places, and I'm the type of pleb who uses indicators / checks blindspots at 3am in the morning when I'm the only person out on the roads. But for some reason in the UK, there's a few roundabouts that have closed-off lanes that haven't been active in years. It was one of these: [QUOTE][IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/ceb3e6b7fcf0ffa7d316120ad399100b.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] The barrier that prevents access [QUOTE][IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/0d66f49883ba7a1a2489882fbfeacbea.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] The roundabout bit. So as I was pulling into the road, I could see it was completely deserted: there were no parked cars, no people around when I attempted the 3-point-turn. I thought it was a super silly thing to give me a minor over, especially since I explicitly remember thinking "I should check my blindspots, but there's absolutely no one here and no way for someone to sneak up on me" because I was hypervigilante since it was my exam. The one place I checked was behind me as I reversed, to make sure a car wasn't coming up behind me. But I didn't check the other blindspots that you usually do to check for people. [editline]21st April 2017[/editline] Keep in mind, the roundabout I did the 3-point-turn on didn't have a single car on it, and there were no kids or families or anything setting up for a picnic. It just got me cause if it had been a busy road, I'd have checked my blindspots and gotten that perfect ace in my exam.

[QUOTE=The Genie;52107938]Let's just hope it's not Apple maps. Satnav: turn left Driver: but we're on a bridge Instructor: do it[/QUOTE] Actually it should test their ability to not be a fucking retard on the road. Too many people will suddenly swerve to avoid missing an exit or not even pay attention to the damn road in front of them. I'd like to see more people learn how to react to that kind of scenario.