Reading the Sunday Times print edition yesterday afternoon,
my eye happened to catch a taster on the front page of the “Driving section” (a
place a have cased to visit since its regular “Bike Guy” feature seems to have
disappeared – not that the perspective on bicycles contained therein appealed
to me much anyway). For those of you who
have an online subscription (which personally I consider to be well worth the
£2pw it costs me) you can find it here.
“Teens face an L of a test” shouts its headline. The story, simply, is of the increasing
difficulty and complexity of the driving test, with new written theory elements
being introduced and the practical test becoming harder. This, it suggests, is one of the principal
reasons why young people are staying away from cars in droves.
Really? And there was
I thinking it might be eye-watering insurance premiums – because young male
drivers have a very poor crash record, and young females are no longer
permitted to have lower premiums which reflect their safer driving behaviour
because apparently that is “discrimination” so, surprise surprise, the insurers
have raised premiums to a level, rather than lowered them. Or it could be the difficulty in finding a
decent job with which to test the skills they have so expensively learned at
Uni (and getting worse, as they start to pay for the free Uni education which
my generation enjoyed) so they couldn’t actually afford a car even if the
insurance was more reasonable. I suppose
the cost of fuel might be in there as well but the AA and RAC report that fuel
is still a pretty minor element in car costs, and it is certainly cheaper as a
marginal cost, once you own a car, than any form of public transport.
Anyway, it does really sound like it has become harder to
take a driving test, but should that trouble us? I can’t believe that really worries youngsters
who have become used to working their rocks off to pass GCSEs and AS levels and
A levels which, while they might perhaps have become less challenging per
grade-point, have surely become harder as you have to have so many grade points
these days. After all, I was accepted to
the University of Oxford in the ‘70s on an A,B & C while an applicant today
would almost certainly need three or even four A/A*s. I watch my sixth-form daughter’s diligence
and effort and almost weep – when I am not gnashing my teeth at her surliness
and rudeness! So, the enhanced driving
test is a minor challenge in comparison.
And anyway, should it be that easy–and that is before anyone introduces specific cyclist or pedestrian-awareness modules to the course? Cars are after all very dangerous objects . They have also
become faster, heavier, and safer, more cotton-woolled for their occupants.
I would contrast the situation with flying. For two decades, until I let it lapse, I was
a qualified private pilot. To qualify I
had to undergo a minimum of 45 hours training, and as only those with really
good flying aptitude can achieve it in the minimum, I like many others took 60
or more hours. I also had to study for
and sit a series of exams in aerodynamics, meteorology, navigation, aviation
law etc.
After that I had to stay in practice with a modest one hour
per month average flying time, and do a retest every two years. I had to demonstrate not only that I could
take off and land, fly straight and level, turn etc, but that I could handle
emergencies such as forced landings, fuel emergencies and engine failures, and
loss of control. One really elementary
skill I had to demonstrate was collision avoidance. While there is a great deal
less up there to collide with than there is down here, you had to be extra
vigilant, and learn the techniques for actually seeing what you are looking at –
apparently small objects which can suddenly seem rather big, apparently
motionless objects which the eye tries to filter out but which can suddenly
seem to move towards you, etc. Does any
of this sound familiar???
And yet, apart from a recent and terrible tragedy, can you
recall ever hearing of a small plane or helicopter crash causing injury
or death to someone on the ground,
outside the vehicle itself?
No, didn’t think so.
No comments:
Post a Comment