Would G D Ls Be Effective ?

[Canary42]

GDL = Graduated Driving Licence. (e.g. after passing Driving Test, progress up to full licence is based on experience.)

See link for one point of view (obviously driven by very tragic circumstances), but the item includes some thoughts on how effective GDLs might be.

Let's hear a few AB views.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-45627115

[One could also argue for some of the recommended restrictions to also begin to phase in with very elderly drivers, e.g. maximum speed, night driving, etc., but that's a topic for another thread]

[retrocop]

ZM
Yes. I have the IAM certificate as well signed by my old friend Dick Clements, Chief Examiner.
The Test is just that. A test. You are supposed to demonstrate those skills but not all skills can be put too the test. Did you spend a day on a skid pan and learn cadence braking. I doubt it .The Advanced Driving courses I took and passed won an automatic certificate to be a big I AM by the simple expedient of applying to the Institute and paying a membership fee.
I know which certificate was the better to achieve. :-)

[Zacs-Master]

The point I’m making is that you seem to imagine that those things have been taught at some point. I pointed out that it hasn’t been the case for some considerable time.
I actually left the IAM when they decided to increase the fees by about 60% at one go.

[retrocop]

//The point I’m making is that you seem to imagine that those things have been taught at some point. I pointed out that it hasn’t been the case for some considerable time.//

Of that I am quite aware. That is why I wrote in my first post that ,imo,today's driving standards could not get much worse.
A lot of important driving manoevres are no longer taught.
It is more useful to have the ability to execute a 3 point turn than be shown how to use a Sat/Nav( which can create it's own problem)

[THECORBYLOON]

RETROCOP, I am asking because you said you're nearly seventy.

The test was changed only last December yet you said the drivers in the accidents when a traffic officer still were not tested on reversing.

Can you see why I'm asking?

[retrocop]

No I cannot
As I wrote earlier. My youngest son learnt to drive about 18 years ago aged 18yrs. He was not taught the 3 manoevres I previously described by his ADI instructor as he was told no longer necessary.He did the theory test first but was told nothing of the Highway Code book by his instructor nor advised to buy one.Do they give examples of all braking distances at all speeds in the specimen theory answers. I don't know but I know they are in the back of the Highway code.
Incidentally.When I took both my HGV and PCV tests it was an instant failure to roll back so much as 1cm on a hill start no matter how great a drive you performed with the examiner up until then.
Are we now saying that the need to show competence for executing this manoeuvre in a car is unnecessary,and deemed safe?

[Canary42]

Thanks for the responses, especially those who stuck to the point.

I like the Black Box idea, the technology is there but the strong motoring lobby would fight tooth and nail to block it (Big Brother and all that nonsense). But after all, it's only an extension of the precedent set with lorry's tachometers.

It would need serious penalties for interference, another no-no to the motoring lobby. We can see from my other motoring thread how lightly penalties are applied.

As regards the problem of providing breadth of training (e.g. motorways in North Scotland), perhaps we should adopt another idea from the airline industry - simulators. Many airline pilots have expressed appreciation of simulating mechanical failures as invaluable when faced with the real thing. Expensive solution, but how much is a life worth.

On balance, I think the GDL idea is a very poor second - for reasons given by several responders already.