Driving Tests for over 70s

[Dustydog]

Let me throw down the gauntlet for Mel.
Like Sir WC I did the Institute of Advanced Motorists test. Thereafter we did further training usually with qualified police officers like Nigel H and became what is known as a qualified Observer.
Join your local Institute and explore aspects of safe progressive driving you've never previously thought of. Cost is peanuts. The Observers are NOT instructors, just decent volunteers, and you use your own car.

 

[camel]

I think it is time to confess, this morning I was gunned by a Bobby doing 55 in a 40 on a rural straight road no houses no pedestrians no footpath perfectly dry road conditions, before I'm criticized I will hold my hands up, he jumped out from behind a bush which I think was cheating, it looks like my punishment will be a Driving awareness course,

 

[Dustydog]

I think it is time to confess, this morning I was gunned by a Bobby doing 55 in a 40 on a rural straight road no houses no pedestrians no footpath perfectly dry road conditions, before I'm criticized I will hold my hands up, he jumped out from behind a bush which I think was cheating, it looks like my punishment will be a Driving awareness course,

Hopefully you may be lucky.
The authorities rule of thumb is subject to no previous speeding conviction in last three years then 10% plus 9mph. Thus in your case the maximum speed offence for a course may be 53.
Fingers crossed a decent person takes a sensible view

 

[ProfJohnL]

I think it is time to confess, this morning I was gunned by a Bobby doing 55 in a 40 on a rural straight road no houses no pedestrians no footpath perfectly dry road conditions, before I'm criticized I will hold my hands up, he jumped out from behind a bush which I think was cheating, it looks like my punishment will be a Driving awareness course,

Hopefully you may be lucky.
The authorities rule of thumb is subject to no previous speeding conviction in last three years then 10% plus 9mph. Thus in your case the maximum speed offence for a course may be 53.
Fingers crossed a decent person takes a sensible view

I am obliged to point out that the law does not recognise any tolerance in the enforcement of speeding, It's the Association Of Chief Police Officers(APCO) who have arbitrarily decided that to ensure a speeding offence cannot be easily challenged to allow offender enough rope to hang themselves. There is nothing stop any area to become a reduced or even zero tolerance of speeders.

 

[Dustydog]

Fully agree with The Prof on the Law.
Be aware not all Local Authorities run "Speed awareness courses". Wiltshire don't. But I understand you can choose the location of where you take the course subject to availability and permission etc.
BTW this is the link that made me start this thread.
https://www.change.org/p/secretary-of-state-for-transport-introduce-compulsory-age-appropriate-retesting-every-3-years-once-a-driver-turns-70?utm_medium=email&utm_source=60187&utm_campaign=petition_update&sfmc_tk=erPWHyVxRLnQwuBlY8M3mBm4W2Aydm%2buMg3zCdJp1l1NEZ%2bBbPVv0ylccDUFsRGT

 

[NigelHutson]

Hello Prof,

What you say is quite correct, especially with regards to experience. However, the study that I mentioned (I'll try to find it's proper title as it has been used many a time in courts, so has been accepted legally) did use drivers, so just think how slow the reactions MIGHT be without the experience playing a part? It might be that someone who is of more mature years might be fully mentally alert, but sadly, the old bones won't move as quickly as they one did, and the reaction time is measured from the point that a hazard is perceived, to the point where they actually do something about it (i.e. hit the brake pedal?), so they might see the hazard, and react as quickly as they can, but it takes time to get to the brake.

The study also quotes "average" reaction times, so obviously some will be quicker, and some slower.

As you can imagine, I investigated numerous fatal crashes over the years, and there are several which stick in my mind. One, a double fatal, involved a caravan (so obviously very close to my own heart), and in that, one of the drivers (who was in his 30's/40's) didn't react at all, despite having at least 400m of view and time in which to do so.

Re-tests/assessments for all would be my ideal, not just one age group.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello again Nigel,

I was not arguing against regular re assessment of driving competence, on the contrary if it raises road safety then that can only be a good thing, particularly when you consider all the poor driving we witness on a daily basis. I am also sure that such a proposal would be vehemently opposed, even though its really for the best.

On a similar and equally unpopular note the other glaring elephant in the room is the potential for domestic trailers to be unroadworthy, becasue there is no regulatory testing, like the MOT for cars

 

[Dustydog]

http://www.lovesafety.com/caravans.html
This link goes some way to explain the different causations of caravan incidents. Seems actual accidents caused by caravan defects are not too bad :blink:

 

[NigelHutson]

Hello again ProfJohn,

It seems that we're singing from the same hymn sheet!

I thought that you might be interested in the following (my ages were a tad out, but.......): -

BRAKE REACTION TIME

Brake reaction time is the time taken by the driver to actuate the brake after the decision to brake. This depends on:
1) The physical and mental characteristics of the driver
2) Driver position and layout of the vehicle controls
Johansen (1977) made a detailed study of driver reaction time. He defined total driver reaction time as the time that elapses from the moment a signal is perceived until the moment the driver initiates preventative action. He described the psychological and physiological processes involved.
Under certain conditions, such as an emergency situation denoted by flashing lights etc., drivers accomplish these tasks almost instantly. Under most other conditions the driver must subconsciously associate the object ahead with stationary objects, such as walls, fences, trees, lampposts or telegraph poles adjacent to the roadway, to determine whether the object is also stationary or moving at a slow speed. This takes a perception time as described above. Vehicle speed and the roadway environment also influence reaction time. A driver, driving in the urban environment and confronted by innumerable possibilities requiring evasive action, i.e. parked vehicles, junctions and pedestrians, is likely to be more alert than when driving on a limited access road I.e. a motorway where such conditions are almost non-existent.
Tests have been conducted which tend to show that when the need to react is expected, reaction time averages about 0.67 seconds, with a few drivers taking as long as 2.0 seconds. With the unexpected need, reaction times increased by about 1 second for alert drivers. For a simple, unexpected decision and action some drivers may take as long as 2.7 seconds to respond. A complex decision with several alternatives. The reaction implied in the Highway Code is based on the average reaction time as determined from tests on a reaction timer when the signal to stop is expected. This figure of 0.68 seconds is totally unacceptable as a total reaction time in the driving environment.
Tests conducted where the driver has to 'gather' information from the environment in order to decide on what action to take resulted in the following approximate reaction times:
Aged up to 25 years 1.9 seconds
Aged 45 to 54 years 1.4 seconds
Aged 64 years and over 1.9 seconds
The long reaction time for young people is as a result of their inexperience in driving, and for the 64 years and over age group as a result of age.
In calculations requiring the use of reaction times, a time scale of 1.4 to 2.0 seconds may be a reasonable reaction time in the normal driving environment.

 

[RayS]

Perhaps we should also consider a 'limited licence' situation, bearing in mind that many of my age - 80+ living in the countryside are dependent on being able to drive to avoid having to move to town. Many coutries - e.g. America - recognise this and issue licences with 'daylight hours only' limitations as an example. This seems to make good sense.
Much of the argument relates to reaction time. Seems to me there are two factors - reaction time and experience and if these were plotted on a graph against age there wold be two points at which they crossed. For the high mileage drivers - much maligned 'Reps' and those ofus who simply had to be all over the country weekly - the experience bank builds very quickly and remains in credit for many years. For those who do the same old commute day in day out - yes, the experience builds but not in the same quality as a different day a different trip.
The American system - renewal based around your birth day - includes a check on recognition of road signs, driving rules etc which takes around 20 minutes and is machine based. It is open to detailed criticism but so is the system where the personal score rate of passes v. failures of an individual examiner comes into play. I can jsut imagine an an examiner being assessed and the opening statement from the Head Honcho being along the lines - 'Well Bloggs, seems all your geese are actually swans this week ?'

Quick law is bad law is not a bad maxim

 

[ProfJohnL]

http://www.lovesafety.com/caravans.html
This link goes some way to explain the different causations of caravan incidents. Seems actual accidents caused by caravan defects are not too bad :blink:

Hello Dusty,
The information and its sources is not sufficiently detailed to know if caravan running gear was defective or not.
Tyre defects of course are noted, and perhaps some of those may have been detected if an MOT style test had been available.

Regardless of the accuracy or otherwise of the article, the fact is there is no Surely if a a proper test regime were in place if it saves just one incident it could be deemed worth it.

 

[Dustydog]

The cost of policing a caravan mot type test would be immense.Dealers can't cope at the moment with normal work.
There are various UK and Australian links which try and apportion causation on caravan accidents.
On the surface and yes no direct evidence mechanical failures are not a major feature. Shame the uk caravan insurers won't tell us their experiences.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Nigel,

Thankyou for the sight of the report. It raises a few more twists,
Further research has revealed another study not specifically related to driving but a more general approach
see
http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/biae.clemson.edu/bpc/bp/Lab/110/reaction.htm#Kinds

look at the "Age" link.

So the whole issue is a lot more involved than can be dealt with by a simple theory. But what is clear is that reaction times are not a constant.

 

[colin-yorkshire]

hang on a bit. I think there is a tendency to over state the obvious wrapped up in theory and statistics. this issue appears be about ONE 85 year old that made a mistake by pressing the gas pedal instead of the brake and mounting the kerb and hitting a pedestrian. who then subsequently died. the relatives of the deceased then decided to start a on line petition to get parliament to debate the issue of older drivers over 70 having to take a retest. as obviously they are ALL incompetent due to age [dementia] and are so much of a danger the only way to decide who is capable is a retest EVERY 3 years.
this has nothing at all to do with reaction times as it was a elementary mistake. and not age related it just happened to be a OAP. so once the ball is rolling we have all this rubbish to discuss.

a sledge hammer to crack a walnut is how I see it there are far more important considerations for the MPs to discuss. in the near future without alienating some of the population due to one incident.

if we have to change the law after every incident it's going to be a very sad country to live in. one wonders what's next a total ban on traffic around schools if child is knocked down. police escorts for for old ladies while they collect their pensions. if one is robbed at the post office. or may be even a total curfew on all males after 10 pm so women can walk home safely after a night out.
how far do you want all this nanny state rubbish to go. I know lets start with making older drivers take retest that will be a good start.

 

[ProfJohnL]

No Colin.
The discussion was not specifically about the incident of the 85 year old, but the more general concern that in reality abilities to drive safely are not reviewed, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that driving standards have slipped

Perhaps its time to follow the lead of virtually all professions where competency to continue has to be assessed on a regular basis and apply it for all drivers.

 

[Martin24]

DD, you're a brave chap, come out with me at Stratford please and just check I'm doing okay.

 

[Dustydog]

DD, you're a brave chap, come out with me at Stratford please and just check I'm doing okay.

Martin
Only if you promise No Hands Free

 

[NigelHutson]

Colin-Yorkshire,

You might be very surprised at the number of times that a driver of more mature years hits the accelerator pedal rather than the brake on vehicles with automatic transmission, and then isn't quick enough to move to the brake, resulting in a collision of some sort. Whether or not it's because the proportion of older drivers who drive automatics is greater than younger drivers, I don't know, but again, I can recall numerous instances of where this happened. Fortunately, the vast majority were minor 'bumps', but at the other end of the scale was serious injury following the car going through the front window of a house after sliding down a steep bank (and the driver admitted pressing harder on the accelerator rather than hitting the brake!).

Nigel.

 

[camel]

The assessment and defensive driving courses I have been on over the years I have enjoyed doing them because these days it is part of the job all that H&S stuff, but you do go along with the attitude thinking that you know it all but in fact you don't,

 

[Martin24]

At least I don't use pedals so I must be really safe :cheer:

 

[colin-yorkshire]

John and Nigel. no I don't know what the statistics are for older drivers who are involved in accidents no more than I know the statistics for younger drivers. foreign drivers. so called professional drivers. no one does except probably the insurance industry and their not telling.
the point i was making is these headline news items have to be taken in isolation as making comments about them in general terms and demanding legislation to stop a perceived issue is generally a bad idea.
there have been many such incidents over the years. but all died away slowly to return to the status quo. yes driving standards have gone down over the years this is certain but apportioning blame for this is game we can all play.

 

[Gabsgrandad]

Have you noticed that "they" all want the over 70's tested, - until they are 69 themselves of course!

 

[emmerson]

Colin-Yorkshire,

You might be very surprised at the number of times that a driver of more mature years hits the accelerator pedal rather than the brake on vehicles with automatic transmission, and then isn't quick enough to move to the brake, resulting in a collision of some sort. Whether or not it's because the proportion of older drivers who drive automatics is greater than younger drivers, I don't know, but again, I can recall numerous instances of where this happened. Fortunately, the vast majority were minor 'bumps', but at the other end of the scale was serious injury following the car going through the front window of a house after sliding down a steep bank (and the driver admitted pressing harder on the accelerator rather than hitting the brake!).

Nigel.

Having driven mainly automatics for many years now, I have got into the habit of left foot braking, and always cover brake with my left foot when maneouvering in tight places, such as positioning the caravan.
I must admit though that I have never hit the throttle instead of the brake.
But then I'm only a boy of 74, and scored 50/50 on the assessment!
Part of my job as TM was to assess new drivers, and believe me, some of them were cr*p, regardless of age!
Yes, I would support re-assessment for all ages, every five years, but cannot imagine how it would be policed.

 

[Dodger524]

I think that the emphasise should be ensuring that those driving have passed a test; I get the impression many haven't.

 

[camel]

I can remember in my youth all the old boys that served in WW2 saying ' I never passed a driving test', can you drive a Sherman Tank, thankfully I never had to, and pre 1969 anyone with a car licence could drive a commercial vehicle,,