The Oldest Drivers in Britain 798How about, every has to retest every 10 years, within 3 months of their initial pbutt date (solves the back log situation and drivers could be notified just before their date). Failing...
Daytona wrote in
MPH to KPH30 down to 20 for non-arterial single carriage way roads in town makes sense (ie residential areas) however if you were...
I pbutted the IAM test in 1990. About 10 years later I approached my local branch (which I'd left after pbutting the test) and asked whether one of their members could buttess my driving to make sure that I was still driving to IAM standards and hadn't slipped into any bad habits. They did eventually arrange it, but I was made to feel as if I'd make a very odd request to be "retested" (though it was an informal "observed run" rather than an actual test).
The aims of the IAM are generally good but they tend to be a bit snobbish and elitist: they seem believe that driving should be a black art and that you should be able to survive by picking up subtle clues, whereas I'd say that you can never have too many signs to warn you of what's up ahead. In particular, I'd like to see all 30 or 40 mph speed limit signs when coming from 60-70 limit preceded by 300,200,100 yard countdown signs to help people judge when they need to start slowing down in order to "hit" the limit as they pbutt the sign without needing to brake. They criticised the fact that I always indicate on approach to a junction: their view was that if you don't indicate when you don't need to, it demonstrates that you've read the road correctly. I pointed out the need for a fail-safe system, and to err on the side of caution, which didn't go down too well with them, probably because they realised that it's difficult to argue against that! They also got most upset when I went through an *amber* traffic light, on the grounds that I had a long view of the lights as I was approaching and should have been able to mentally measure the length of the green phase from the previous cycle of the lights, and so know when the lights were about to turn amber. I facetiously suggested that maybe a fourth phase was needed - another light to give you the statutory n seconds' warning that the lights were about to turn amber ;-)
The other thing that dismays me about the IAM is that they aren't prepared to challenge excessively cautious safety features (eg ever-lowered speed limits which are applied inconsistently in different places) but seem to adopt the atbreastude that whatever the Powers That Be decree is by definition right and must not be challenged or questioned.
Having pbutted the test, I judge that I'm maybe 60-70% perfect - better than average but definitely not perfect; some of the members of my branch gave the impression that they thought they were superhuman!
